https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70149 A lump sum paid to employees under an agreement revising service conditions was treated as revenue expenditure because it was incurred on commercial expediency to secure business advantage and not as gratuity in the strict legal sense, so the deduction was allowed. The claim relating to provision for gratuity remained subject to the statutory conditions for the relevant assessment year, and limited verification of compliance under section 40A(7)(b)(ii) was upheld because the assessee had not established compliance before the appellate authority. en-us Fri, 29 Apr 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:51:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70149 A lump sum paid to employees under an agreement revising service conditions was treated as revenue expenditure because it was incurred on commercial expediency to secure business advantage and not as gratuity in the strict legal sense, so the deduction was allowed. The claim relating to provision for gratuity remained subject to the statutory conditions for the relevant assessment year, and limited verification of compliance under section 40A(7)(b)(ii) was upheld because the assessee had not established compliance before the appellate authority. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Apr 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70149