https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298211 Employee embezzlement did not alter the income-tax treatment merely because the employee acted alone at the point of misappropriation; the decisive factor was that access to the cash arose from the trust and position given by the bank, so the Revenue's objection failed. The resulting loss from taking cash was incidental to carrying on the banking business because banking necessarily operates through human agency and carries an inherent risk of employee misappropriation, even where the act occurred on a holiday. The loss was therefore treated as a deductible business loss incidental to the banking business. en-us Fri, 30 Nov 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Oct 2021 16:30:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298211 Employee embezzlement did not alter the income-tax treatment merely because the employee acted alone at the point of misappropriation; the decisive factor was that access to the cash arose from the trust and position given by the bank, so the Revenue's objection failed. The resulting loss from taking cash was incidental to carrying on the banking business because banking necessarily operates through human agency and carries an inherent risk of employee misappropriation, even where the act occurred on a holiday. The loss was therefore treated as a deductible business loss incidental to the banking business. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Nov 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298211