https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443048 ITAT Kolkata (AT) allowed the assessees' bad-debt claim, finding the provision was an inadvertent mislabeling and met s.36(2)(i) conditions, and set aside the CIT(A) on that issue. The tribunal deleted an addition under s.41(1) r.w.s.28(iv) relating to cessation of liability, holding the creditor liability was genuine. The disallowance for pandal decoration expenses was upheld as bogus for lack of supporting evidence. Repair and maintenance (interior decoration of rented office) was held to be revenue expenditure and allowed, reversing the CIT(A). en-us Fri, 07 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Sep 2025 11:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443048 ITAT Kolkata (AT) allowed the assessees' bad-debt claim, finding the provision was an inadvertent mislabeling and met s.36(2)(i) conditions, and set aside the CIT(A) on that issue. The tribunal deleted an addition under s.41(1) r.w.s.28(iv) relating to cessation of liability, holding the creditor liability was genuine. The disallowance for pandal decoration expenses was upheld as bogus for lack of supporting evidence. Repair and maintenance (interior decoration of rented office) was held to be revenue expenditure and allowed, reversing the CIT(A). Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443048