https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172429 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow repairs expenses as revenue expenditure, dismissing Revenue's appeal claiming them as capital in nature. Additionally, the ITAT supported the CIT(A)'s ruling in favor of the assessee regarding the deemed dividend issue under section 2(22)(e) of the Act, stating it did not apply as the assessee was not a shareholder of the lender company. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decisions of the CIT(A) on both matters. en-us Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:54:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172429 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to allow repairs expenses as revenue expenditure, dismissing Revenue's appeal claiming them as capital in nature. Additionally, the ITAT supported the CIT(A)'s ruling in favor of the assessee regarding the deemed dividend issue under section 2(22)(e) of the Act, stating it did not apply as the assessee was not a shareholder of the lender company. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decisions of the CIT(A) on both matters. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172429