https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78089 The High Court partially allowed the appeal, disallowing the deduction of Rs. 15,34,951 for security deposits written off as unrealizable, stating they were capital in nature and not incidental to business. However, the deduction of Rs. 5,18,380 for advances to employees written off was allowed as a business loss under Section 28 of the Income Tax Act, as they were considered revenue in nature and directly linked to business operations. The judgment highlighted the distinction between capital and revenue expenditures in determining deductibility. en-us Tue, 14 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 May 2012 15:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78089 The High Court partially allowed the appeal, disallowing the deduction of Rs. 15,34,951 for security deposits written off as unrealizable, stating they were capital in nature and not incidental to business. However, the deduction of Rs. 5,18,380 for advances to employees written off was allowed as a business loss under Section 28 of the Income Tax Act, as they were considered revenue in nature and directly linked to business operations. The judgment highlighted the distinction between capital and revenue expenditures in determining deductibility. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 14 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78089