https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64158 Gratuity claimed as business expenditure was disallowed because it was only a provision, no actual payment was shown during the relevant accounting period, and the conditions of section 40A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were not satisfied. Retrenchment allowance was also disallowed because the business continued, no actual retrenchment was established, no notice under section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was issued, and no payment was made. The enhanced claim based on a connected firm's case was rejected because that decision did not create a deductible liability in the assessee's hands. en-us Mon, 02 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Feb 2011 11:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64158 Gratuity claimed as business expenditure was disallowed because it was only a provision, no actual payment was shown during the relevant accounting period, and the conditions of section 40A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were not satisfied. Retrenchment allowance was also disallowed because the business continued, no actual retrenchment was established, no notice under section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was issued, and no payment was made. The enhanced claim based on a connected firm's case was rejected because that decision did not create a deductible liability in the assessee's hands. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 02 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64158