Section 38 — the law in short
What the courts have decided on section 38, in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
Danesh A. Irani v CIT — proportionate deduction under s.38 where only part of the premises is occupied for the business
High CourtHelps departmentValidity unconfirmed
I am a tenant of part of a building and I paid to replace the whole roof. The Assessing Officer has allowed me only the proportion of the area I occupy. Is that right?
Yes, on this decision. The Bombay High Court held that where the expenditure relates to a building that is not exclusively used for the business, s.38 vests a discretion in the Assessing Officer to grant a proportionate deduction, and it upheld a deduction computed on the ratio of the area occupied — 3,700 square feet out of about 30,000.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.