https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70007 Lease rent paid to a related firm was required to be tested against market value and reliable comparables for purposes of section 40A(2)(a); in the absence of any dependable comparable instance, the basis for treating the rent as excessive was found unsound and the addition was deleted. A non-compete payment to directors was treated as a commercial revenue outlay, but because the payment conferred a benefit on directors, the special rule governing director-related expenditure had to prevail over the general anti-avoidance provision. The amount was therefore to be aggregated with directors' remuneration and examined against the applicable ceiling under the special provision. en-us Tue, 26 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:03:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70007 Lease rent paid to a related firm was required to be tested against market value and reliable comparables for purposes of section 40A(2)(a); in the absence of any dependable comparable instance, the basis for treating the rent as excessive was found unsound and the addition was deleted. A non-compete payment to directors was treated as a commercial revenue outlay, but because the payment conferred a benefit on directors, the special rule governing director-related expenditure had to prevail over the general anti-avoidance provision. The amount was therefore to be aggregated with directors' remuneration and examined against the applicable ceiling under the special provision. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70007