https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207396 The court held that the circular dated January 23, 2001, was not binding on the Assessing Officer as it conflicted with judicial decisions. It found that the Board's instructions should not interfere with quasi-judicial functions. The court ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Tribunal's and Commissioner's orders. It emphasized that VRS payments should be treated as revenue expenditure based on established legal principles and judicial precedents. The original assessment allowing VRS payments as revenue expenditure was upheld, and the appeal was allowed without costs. en-us Tue, 02 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Jun 2013 15:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207396 The court held that the circular dated January 23, 2001, was not binding on the Assessing Officer as it conflicted with judicial decisions. It found that the Board's instructions should not interfere with quasi-judicial functions. The court ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Tribunal's and Commissioner's orders. It emphasized that VRS payments should be treated as revenue expenditure based on established legal principles and judicial precedents. The original assessment allowing VRS payments as revenue expenditure was upheld, and the appeal was allowed without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 02 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207396