https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240068 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on various issues. Notably, it held that the remission of loan liability is a capital receipt and not taxable under Section 41(1). It also determined that lease rental expenses were for an operating lease, not a finance lease, allowing them as revenue expenditure. Additionally, the Tribunal directed the disallowance under Section 14A to be added back while computing book profit under Section 115JB. The decisions emphasized consistency and adherence to legal precedents. en-us Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240068 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on various issues. Notably, it held that the remission of loan liability is a capital receipt and not taxable under Section 41(1). It also determined that lease rental expenses were for an operating lease, not a finance lease, allowing them as revenue expenditure. Additionally, the Tribunal directed the disallowance under Section 14A to be added back while computing book profit under Section 115JB. The decisions emphasized consistency and adherence to legal precedents. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240068