https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209363 The court upheld the disallowance of the employer's expenditure for contribution to an unrecognized Employees Welfare Fund, citing section 40A(9) of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that contributions must align with specific provisions, and since the employer's contribution did not comply, it was not allowable. Additionally, the court dismissed the deduction claim for research and development expenditure as the advance payment for equipment did not constitute incurred expenditure in the current year. Therefore, both appeals challenging the disallowance and deduction were rejected based on the court's interpretation of the relevant provisions. en-us Tue, 02 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jul 2013 13:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209363 The court upheld the disallowance of the employer's expenditure for contribution to an unrecognized Employees Welfare Fund, citing section 40A(9) of the Income-tax Act. The court emphasized that contributions must align with specific provisions, and since the employer's contribution did not comply, it was not allowable. Additionally, the court dismissed the deduction claim for research and development expenditure as the advance payment for equipment did not constitute incurred expenditure in the current year. Therefore, both appeals challenging the disallowance and deduction were rejected based on the court's interpretation of the relevant provisions. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 02 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209363