https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18167 The court ruled in favor of the assessee in both issues. Regarding the interpretation of sections 40A(5) and 40(c) for managing director payments, the court upheld the application of section 40(c) based on precedent. For the treatment of expenditure on free samples supplied to doctors under section 37(3A), the court deemed the samples essential for testing drug efficacy, excluding them from section 37(3A) disallowance as essential business expenditure. en-us Thu, 27 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:54:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18167 The court ruled in favor of the assessee in both issues. Regarding the interpretation of sections 40A(5) and 40(c) for managing director payments, the court upheld the application of section 40(c) based on precedent. For the treatment of expenditure on free samples supplied to doctors under section 37(3A), the court deemed the samples essential for testing drug efficacy, excluding them from section 37(3A) disallowance as essential business expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 27 Jul 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18167