Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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.