https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207232 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on various issues: 1) Expenditure on purchase of flowers and plants was treated as revenue expenditure, not capital. 2) Provision for leave encashment was allowed as a deduction. 3) Repair and maintenance expenses for office refurnishing were considered revenue expenditure. 4) Expenditure on installations was treated as revenue, not capital. 5) Professional charges were accepted with additional evidence. 6) Foreign travel expenses were partially allowed based on business purposes. The Tribunal emphasized factual evidence and legal precedents in determining expenditure nature, dismissing the revenue's appeal and partly allowing the assessee's cross-objection. en-us Fri, 05 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Dec 2011 07:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207232 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on various issues: 1) Expenditure on purchase of flowers and plants was treated as revenue expenditure, not capital. 2) Provision for leave encashment was allowed as a deduction. 3) Repair and maintenance expenses for office refurnishing were considered revenue expenditure. 4) Expenditure on installations was treated as revenue, not capital. 5) Professional charges were accepted with additional evidence. 6) Foreign travel expenses were partially allowed based on business purposes. The Tribunal emphasized factual evidence and legal precedents in determining expenditure nature, dismissing the revenue's appeal and partly allowing the assessee's cross-objection. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207232