VittSphere ONE Calculators Blog CA Prabhakar Kumar · FCA · ICAI 560762
Case lawIncome-tax Act 2025Chapter IV › Section 60
Chapter IVwas s.44C

Section 60 of the Income-tax Act, 2025

Section 60 — Deduction of head office expenditure in case of non-residents. Successor to s.44C of the 1961 Act.

Where this section sits

Section 60 is in Chapter IV — Computation of Total Income, which runs from section 13 to section 95.

← Section 59  ·  Section 61 →

What this section does

Sub-section (1) allows a non-resident assessee, notwithstanding sections 26 to 54, a deduction for head office expenditure incurred by him as is attributable to his business or profession in India, in computing income under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession", subject to sub-section (2).

Sub-section (2) restricts it to an upper monetary limit of 5% of the average adjusted total income where the adjusted total income is a loss, and to an upper monetary limit of 5% of the adjusted total income in any other case.

Sub-section (3) defines the terms. "Adjusted total income" is total income computed under the Act without giving effect to this allowance, the allowance in section 33(11), the deduction in section 32(i)(A), any loss carried forward under section 111(1), 112(1), 113(2) or 115(2), or the deductions under Chapter VIII. "Average adjusted total income" is the arithmetic mean over the three immediately preceding tax years where the assessee is assessable for each, over two where he is assessable for only two, and the single year's figure where only one. "Head office expenditure" is executive and general administration expenditure incurred outside India, including rent, rates, taxes, repairs or insurance of premises outside India used for the business; salary and other employment payments to persons employed in or managing an office outside India; travelling by such persons; and such other matters connected with executive and general administration as may be prescribed.

Why it is there

A non-resident running a branch in India carries central costs abroad that genuinely serve the Indian operation, and the section admits them rather than confining deductions to expenditure incurred in India. But an allocation made abroad cannot easily be tested from India, so the Act puts a hard proportional ceiling on it instead of litigating the allocation. The loss-year rule exists because 5% of a loss would be meaningless.

Who it applies to

The figures, and what each one turns on

Read the condition in the same row. A figure quoted without it is a wrong answer with a citation attached.
WhatFigureThe condition on itWhere
Ceiling on the deduction in a loss yearAn upper monetary limit of 5% of the average adjusted total incomeWhere the adjusted total income of the assessee is a lossSub-section (2)(a)
Ceiling on the deduction in any other yearAn upper monetary limit of 5% of the adjusted total incomeAdjusted total income computed under sub-section (3)(a), that is before this allowance, section 33(11), section 32(i)(A), carried forward losses under sections 111(1), 112(1), 113(2) and 115(2), and Chapter VIII deductionsSub-section (2)(b)
Period for the averageThe three tax years immediately preceding the relevant tax yearArithmetic mean over those three if assessable for each; over two if assessable for only two; the single year's figure if only oneSub-section (3)(b)(i) to (iii)

What this means in practice

The 5% is an upper monetary limit, not the deduction. What is allowed is the head office expenditure attributable to the Indian business, and 5% caps it — an assessee whose attributable cost is lower deducts the lower figure, and one who simply claims 5% has misread sub-section (1). The base is adjusted total income, built before this very allowance and before Chapter VIII deductions and the listed carried-forward losses, so it is not the total income that appears on the return. In a loss year the base switches to the three-year average, and sub-section (3)(c) confines the expenditure itself to executive and general administration expenditure incurred outside India.

An example

Illustrative only, and invented for this page. The figures are chosen to show the rule biting, not taken from any real matter.

A non-resident company runs an Indian branch. Its adjusted total income under sub-section (3)(a) is Rs. 10 crore and the head office expenditure attributable to the branch is Rs. 80 lakh. The ceiling under sub-section (2)(b) is Rs. 50 lakh, so Rs. 50 lakh is allowed and Rs. 30 lakh is not. Had that year's adjusted total income been a loss, the ceiling would be 5% of the arithmetic mean of the three immediately preceding years' adjusted total income.

Where you meet this section

You meet this section computing the branch profits of a non-resident for the return, and again when an Assessing Officer restricts the head office allocation in an assessment order — the dispute is usually over the adjusted total income base rather than the 5%.

The words themselves

in any other case, to an upper monetary limit of 5% of the adjusted total income of the assessee
Section 60(2)(b), Income-tax Act, 2025.
"head office expenditure" means executive and general administration expenditure incurred by the assessee outside India
Section 60(3)(c), Income-tax Act, 2025.

What people get wrong

What this replaced

The correspondence is the Income Tax Department’s own, from its comparison utility for the 1961 and 2025 Acts. A renumbering is the easy half; whether the words changed is the half that decides cases.

See the full 1961 to 2025 concordance.

Circulars of the Board on this section

A circular binds the department, not you and not a court. Every one below was written under the 1961 Act; it reaches this section because the department’s own concordance carries the provision it names to this one.

See the circulars index.

Read with

What this page does not tell you. It does not reproduce the section. Everything above was written from the section’s own text as the Income Tax Department publishes it — the text is here, and nothing here is advice on your facts. Where a figure matters, read the sub-section it comes from.