<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (10) TMI 780 - ITAT, DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217842</link>
    <description>Minor repairs and maintenance expenditure used for office and other business items was treated as revenue expenditure because it did not create any asset of enduring nature and represented current repairs necessary for effective business use; the disallowance as capital expenditure was deleted. Amounts written off, including a forfeited security deposit adjusted against rent and utility charges and an advance to a lorry vendor given in the ordinary course of business, were allowed as business loss because the claim reflected genuine irrecoverable business outgoings rather than being confined narrowly to bad debt treatment; the disallowance was deleted. The revenue&#039;s appeal failed on both additions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2012 18:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=191216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 780 - ITAT, DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217842</link>
      <description>Minor repairs and maintenance expenditure used for office and other business items was treated as revenue expenditure because it did not create any asset of enduring nature and represented current repairs necessary for effective business use; the disallowance as capital expenditure was deleted. Amounts written off, including a forfeited security deposit adjusted against rent and utility charges and an advance to a lorry vendor given in the ordinary course of business, were allowed as business loss because the claim reflected genuine irrecoverable business outgoings rather than being confined narrowly to bad debt treatment; the disallowance was deleted. The revenue&#039;s appeal failed on both additions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217842</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>