https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71188 Commission paid to authorised dealer firms was examined as a business expenditure claim under section 37(1). The Tribunal noted that written dealer agreements, cheque-based payments, books of account, dealer assessment records and supporting testimony showed that services such as canvassing, order booking and collection support were actually rendered. A retracted statement under section 132(4), without independent corroboration or incriminating material showing routing back of commission, was insufficient to displace the documentary evidence. The Revenue could not reduce an otherwise genuine business expense to an estimated amount in the absence of a specific disallowance provision. en-us Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:38:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71188 Commission paid to authorised dealer firms was examined as a business expenditure claim under section 37(1). The Tribunal noted that written dealer agreements, cheque-based payments, books of account, dealer assessment records and supporting testimony showed that services such as canvassing, order booking and collection support were actually rendered. A retracted statement under section 132(4), without independent corroboration or incriminating material showing routing back of commission, was insufficient to displace the documentary evidence. The Revenue could not reduce an otherwise genuine business expense to an estimated amount in the absence of a specific disallowance provision. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71188