https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352996 The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the appellant on both issues. Regarding the disallowance of warehousing expenses as capital expenditure, the Tribunal held that the expenses were revenue in nature as they were incurred for repairing a dilapidated wall, contrary to the AO's view. The Tribunal relied on a Madras High Court decision and directed the AO to delete the addition. Concerning the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct tax at source, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant that no disallowance should apply as the recipient had paid taxes and furnished a certificate, in line with a Delhi High Court decision. en-us Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Dec 2017 08:40:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352996 The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the appellant on both issues. Regarding the disallowance of warehousing expenses as capital expenditure, the Tribunal held that the expenses were revenue in nature as they were incurred for repairing a dilapidated wall, contrary to the AO's view. The Tribunal relied on a Madras High Court decision and directed the AO to delete the addition. Concerning the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct tax at source, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant that no disallowance should apply as the recipient had paid taxes and furnished a certificate, in line with a Delhi High Court decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352996