1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Payment to Minor Not Legitimate Business Expenditure; Judgment on Income Application vs. Diversion</h1> The High Court of Allahabad held that the payment to the minor was not a legitimate business expenditure except for a reasonable interest on the ... Business Expenditure Issues:1. Whether the payment to the minor under the agreement is a legitimate business expenditure and an allowable deductionRs.2. Whether there was material before the Tribunal to conclude that the payment to the minor was not a diversion of income but an application of incomeRs.Analysis:The judgment delivered by the High Court of Allahabad involved two key questions referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The first issue addressed was whether the payment made to the minor under the agreement dated August 24, 1963, could be considered a legitimate business expenditure and an allowable deduction. The Tribunal disbelieved the assertion that the minor's investment brought good luck to the business, leading to the conclusion that any payment exceeding a reasonable interest on the investment could not be deemed a legitimate business expense. The court held that the payment to the minor was not a legitimate business expenditure except for a reasonable interest on the investment made by the minor.Moving on to the second issue, the Tribunal questioned whether there was sufficient evidence to support the assertion that the payment to the minor was not a diversion of income but an application of income. The Tribunal's observations indicated skepticism towards the claim that the minor's investment significantly contributed to the business's success. The court emphasized that the burden of proof rested with the assessee, who failed to provide substantial evidence beyond the agreement dated August 24, 1963. Consequently, the court concluded that the payment to the minor was not a diversion of income by an overriding title but merely an application of the assessee's income.In summary, the High Court of Allahabad ruled that the payment to the minor was not a legitimate business expenditure beyond a reasonable interest on the investment and that there was sufficient material before the Tribunal to establish that the payment to the minor was an application of income rather than a diversion of income. The judgment directed the parties to bear their own costs, bringing closure to the legal proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
