https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235293 The court determined that the payment to NSDL for custody charges constituted a revenue expenditure, deductible under Section 37(1). The expenditure on installing traffic signals was also considered business expenditure under the same section. Claiming a deduction under Section 80G was not deemed as double deduction. However, the provision for warranty charges and deduction under Section 80HHE were set aside for fresh consideration. The appeal was partially allowed, with each party bearing its own costs. en-us Mon, 22 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Jun 2026 15:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235293 The court determined that the payment to NSDL for custody charges constituted a revenue expenditure, deductible under Section 37(1). The expenditure on installing traffic signals was also considered business expenditure under the same section. Claiming a deduction under Section 80G was not deemed as double deduction. However, the provision for warranty charges and deduction under Section 80HHE were set aside for fresh consideration. The appeal was partially allowed, with each party bearing its own costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 22 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235293