Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Medical reimbursement paid by a company to its salaried full-time employee and promoter-director for critical heart surgery was held deductible as business expenditure under section 37(1). The Tribunal found the payment commercially expedient because the employee was the driving force behind the business, the surgery was genuine and undertaken at a recognised hospital, and the company bore only part of the total cost while the balance was personally met. It also held that the timing of the Board resolution, the marginal excess over the sanctioned amount, and the argument of personal expenditure did not justify disallowance. The reimbursement, authorised and debited as employee benefit expense, was therefore allowable and the disallowance was deleted.
Medical reimbursement paid by a company to its salaried full-time employee and promoter-director for critical heart surgery was held deductible as business expenditure under section 37(1). The Tribunal found the payment commercially expedient because the employee was the driving force behind the business, the surgery was genuine and undertaken at a recognised hospital, and the company bore only part of the total cost while the balance was personally met. It also held that the timing of the Board resolution, the marginal excess over the sanctioned amount, and the argument of personal expenditure did not justify disallowance. The reimbursement, authorised and debited as employee benefit expense, was therefore allowable and the disallowance was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
