https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34455 The partnership firm, appellant in a tax dispute, challenged the reduction of commission for goods sold to its sister concern from 8% to 5%. The Tribunal cited excessive discount and lack of justification for the reduction. The appellant argued for consistency in discount rates and business rationale for the higher discount. The High Court clarified that Section 40A(2) did not apply to trade discounts, as they are not considered expenditures. The judgment emphasized the need for valid justifications in adjusting discount rates and highlighted the disparity in discounts offered to the sister concern compared to other parties. en-us Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Aug 2016 11:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34455 The partnership firm, appellant in a tax dispute, challenged the reduction of commission for goods sold to its sister concern from 8% to 5%. The Tribunal cited excessive discount and lack of justification for the reduction. The appellant argued for consistency in discount rates and business rationale for the higher discount. The High Court clarified that Section 40A(2) did not apply to trade discounts, as they are not considered expenditures. The judgment emphasized the need for valid justifications in adjusting discount rates and highlighted the disparity in discounts offered to the sister concern compared to other parties. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34455