https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69315 The expression "capital employed" was construed broadly and distinguished from capital actually used in the business. An advance to a director was treated as a debt due to the company and therefore as an asset falling within section 19A(2)(iv). The Income-tax Officer's exclusion of that amount from the capital employed computation was held incorrect, and the advance was includible in capital employed. The assessee's computation was accepted. en-us Sat, 18 Aug 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Apr 2011 11:53:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69315 The expression "capital employed" was construed broadly and distinguished from capital actually used in the business. An advance to a director was treated as a debt due to the company and therefore as an asset falling within section 19A(2)(iv). The Income-tax Officer's exclusion of that amount from the capital employed computation was held incorrect, and the advance was includible in capital employed. The assessee's computation was accepted. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 18 Aug 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69315