https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177125 Litigation expenses incurred to challenge seizure of yarn under a Control Order were treated as non-deductible because they arose from the assessee's own breach of law. The governing principle was that expenditure is allowable only if it is incurred in the character of a trader and wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning profits; spending money to defend, justify, or resist the consequences of an unlawful act is not a business outgoing or commercial loss. The Madras HC therefore held that the legal costs were not deductible in computing taxable profits and were not allowable as business expenditure. en-us Wed, 19 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Jan 2016 12:26:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177125 Litigation expenses incurred to challenge seizure of yarn under a Control Order were treated as non-deductible because they arose from the assessee's own breach of law. The governing principle was that expenditure is allowable only if it is incurred in the character of a trader and wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning profits; spending money to defend, justify, or resist the consequences of an unlawful act is not a business outgoing or commercial loss. The Madras HC therefore held that the legal costs were not deductible in computing taxable profits and were not allowable as business expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Sep 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177125