https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33862 A non-resident company with no permanent establishment, no office in India, and no contract in execution during the relevant period was not carrying on business in India. Mere correspondence, efforts to secure future work, or a temporary business lull did not make expenses and depreciation allowable as business deductions for that period. Because no business was being carried on in India, the claimed losses could not be treated as business loss capable of set-off under Section 71 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal erred in allowing the set-off, and the Revenue's position was upheld. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 12:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33862 A non-resident company with no permanent establishment, no office in India, and no contract in execution during the relevant period was not carrying on business in India. Mere correspondence, efforts to secure future work, or a temporary business lull did not make expenses and depreciation allowable as business deductions for that period. Because no business was being carried on in India, the claimed losses could not be treated as business loss capable of set-off under Section 71 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal erred in allowing the set-off, and the Revenue's position was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33862