https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424503 The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of legal and professional expenditure of Rs.15,000 due to lack of supporting evidence. Additionally, the expenditure of Rs.6,05,470 paid to a contractor was classified as capital expenditure for creating an asset, allowing depreciation benefits. The disallowance of Rs.1,58,800 under Section 40A(3) was upheld as the assessee failed to provide evidence for cash payments below the threshold. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decisions of the assessing officer and Commissioner (Appeals). Judgment was rendered on 23rd June 2022. en-us Thu, 23 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Jul 2022 09:12:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424503 The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of legal and professional expenditure of Rs.15,000 due to lack of supporting evidence. Additionally, the expenditure of Rs.6,05,470 paid to a contractor was classified as capital expenditure for creating an asset, allowing depreciation benefits. The disallowance of Rs.1,58,800 under Section 40A(3) was upheld as the assessee failed to provide evidence for cash payments below the threshold. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the decisions of the assessing officer and Commissioner (Appeals). Judgment was rendered on 23rd June 2022. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 23 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424503