https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210999 The tribunal upheld the Revenue's position that the disputed expenditure of Rs.23,19,547, related to penal charges paid to a sister concern, was not a liability of the assessee company. Despite arguments based on commercial expediency and past allowances, the tribunal emphasized the absence of a binding contractual obligation between the parties. Consequently, the appeal against the addition of the expenditure not related to the business was dismissed on January 6, 2012, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 18:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210999 The tribunal upheld the Revenue's position that the disputed expenditure of Rs.23,19,547, related to penal charges paid to a sister concern, was not a liability of the assessee company. Despite arguments based on commercial expediency and past allowances, the tribunal emphasized the absence of a binding contractual obligation between the parties. Consequently, the appeal against the addition of the expenditure not related to the business was dismissed on January 6, 2012, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 06 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210999