https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276514 Question concerned whether amounts paid by a bank to constituents after a dacoity were deductible. The court held that claims under bad-debt principles were not maintainable where debtors were not shown to be insolvent, and loss of pledged ornaments was a loss as owner of property not deductible under trading-loss rules. However, the notional account set-offs and voluntary payments to preserve client confidence were expenditures laid out wholly and exclusively for the business of money lending and therefore deductible under the business-expenditure provision. Outcome: the specified amounts were allowable as deductions under the business-expenditure head. en-us Thu, 12 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Nov 2018 11:27:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276514 Question concerned whether amounts paid by a bank to constituents after a dacoity were deductible. The court held that claims under bad-debt principles were not maintainable where debtors were not shown to be insolvent, and loss of pledged ornaments was a loss as owner of property not deductible under trading-loss rules. However, the notional account set-offs and voluntary payments to preserve client confidence were expenditures laid out wholly and exclusively for the business of money lending and therefore deductible under the business-expenditure provision. Outcome: the specified amounts were allowable as deductions under the business-expenditure head. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 12 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276514