https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68083 A nominal increase in rent paid to a related person was treated as a business expenditure supported by commercial expediency, and the disallowance under section 40A(2)(a) was deleted because no rational basis justified the addition. The ad hoc disallowance from telephone expenses was also deleted because the claim was small relative to the scale of business and income, and no adequate material supported a reduction. Both additions were set aside, leaving the assessee entitled to full relief in the appeals. en-us Tue, 30 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:08:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68083 A nominal increase in rent paid to a related person was treated as a business expenditure supported by commercial expediency, and the disallowance under section 40A(2)(a) was deleted because no rational basis justified the addition. The ad hoc disallowance from telephone expenses was also deleted because the claim was small relative to the scale of business and income, and no adequate material supported a reduction. Both additions were set aside, leaving the assessee entitled to full relief in the appeals. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Jan 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68083