https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397570 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in a tax case, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) correctly allowed the forfeiture of security deposit as a business loss under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, accepted the explanation for interest expenses, and directed the A.O. to verify depreciation claims on assets. The Tribunal concluded that the Revenue did not provide enough grounds to challenge the CIT(A)'s findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal on all three issues. en-us Thu, 20 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Aug 2020 11:53:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397570 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in a tax case, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) correctly allowed the forfeiture of security deposit as a business loss under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, accepted the explanation for interest expenses, and directed the A.O. to verify depreciation claims on assets. The Tribunal concluded that the Revenue did not provide enough grounds to challenge the CIT(A)'s findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal on all three issues. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397570