https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272048 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, ruling that the advance from M/s. ABP Pvt. Ltd. to the assessee company for business purposes did not constitute deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. It allowed the treatment of expenses as revenue expenditure, except for the filing fee, which was considered capital in nature. The Tribunal also supported the deletion of disallowance under Section 14A due to the absence of exempt income and the AO's failure to express dissatisfaction with the assessee's claim. The revenue's appeal was partly allowed. en-us Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Feb 2016 08:51:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272048 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, ruling that the advance from M/s. ABP Pvt. Ltd. to the assessee company for business purposes did not constitute deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act. It allowed the treatment of expenses as revenue expenditure, except for the filing fee, which was considered capital in nature. The Tribunal also supported the deletion of disallowance under Section 14A due to the absence of exempt income and the AO's failure to express dissatisfaction with the assessee's claim. The revenue's appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272048