https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291592 A money-lending transaction connected with advances made in the course of business was held not to be outside the scope of the lender's business, because taking steps to protect sums advanced was treated as part of the lending activity. Legal expenses incurred in defending a suit arising directly from that transaction were held to be revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure, because money used in the business was treated as stock-in-trade and the defence was a necessary incident of protecting that trading asset. The claimed deduction was therefore allowable as a business deduction. en-us Tue, 17 Oct 1939 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291592 A money-lending transaction connected with advances made in the course of business was held not to be outside the scope of the lender's business, because taking steps to protect sums advanced was treated as part of the lending activity. Legal expenses incurred in defending a suit arising directly from that transaction were held to be revenue expenditure, not capital expenditure, because money used in the business was treated as stock-in-trade and the defence was a necessary incident of protecting that trading asset. The claimed deduction was therefore allowable as a business deduction. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Oct 1939 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291592