https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401187 The Tribunal allowed both appeals of the assessee, holding that the disallowance made by the AO under section 40A(2)(b) was not justified. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the AO to determine the fair market rent and bring comparable cases on record before making any disallowance. The decision highlighted that suspicion cannot substitute evidence and that the AO's actions were arbitrary and contrary to the law. The Tribunal's ruling ensured that the assessee's business expenditure was recognized appropriately and not arbitrarily disallowed. en-us Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Nov 2020 11:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401187 The Tribunal allowed both appeals of the assessee, holding that the disallowance made by the AO under section 40A(2)(b) was not justified. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the AO to determine the fair market rent and bring comparable cases on record before making any disallowance. The decision highlighted that suspicion cannot substitute evidence and that the AO's actions were arbitrary and contrary to the law. The Tribunal's ruling ensured that the assessee's business expenditure was recognized appropriately and not arbitrarily disallowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401187