https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260427 The ITAT partially allowed the appeal, remanding certain issues back to the AO for reevaluation. The deduction of business loss under section 28 was allowed as the advances were deemed part of the business. However, the disallowance of penalty for infringement of law was upheld, as it was considered punitive, not compensatory. Additionally, the disallowance of export and sales promotion expenses was affirmed due to lack of evidence of business necessity. The disallowance of repairing expenses as capital expenditure was remanded for further verification to distinguish between revenue and capital expenditure. en-us Thu, 05 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jun 2015 05:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260427 The ITAT partially allowed the appeal, remanding certain issues back to the AO for reevaluation. The deduction of business loss under section 28 was allowed as the advances were deemed part of the business. However, the disallowance of penalty for infringement of law was upheld, as it was considered punitive, not compensatory. Additionally, the disallowance of export and sales promotion expenses was affirmed due to lack of evidence of business necessity. The disallowance of repairing expenses as capital expenditure was remanded for further verification to distinguish between revenue and capital expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 05 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260427