https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400284 The High Court of Madras upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2012-13. The Court emphasized the irrelevance of the nature of the expense for claiming deduction under this section and highlighted the importance of commercial expediency in advancing funds. Additionally, the Court held that the matching principle does not apply to an Investment Company following the cash method of accounting. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing that the determination of commercial expediency is a factual finding and not a question of law. en-us Mon, 05 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Nov 2020 15:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400284 The High Court of Madras upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2012-13. The Court emphasized the irrelevance of the nature of the expense for claiming deduction under this section and highlighted the importance of commercial expediency in advancing funds. Additionally, the Court held that the matching principle does not apply to an Investment Company following the cash method of accounting. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing that the determination of commercial expediency is a factual finding and not a question of law. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400284