https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751324 Commission paid to a managing director was treated as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure, with the revenue authority's method upheld on the basis that the payment had been shown as expenditure and received by the beneficiary in the subsequent assessment year. The court also noted that the fact that the liability was ratified only after the board meeting did not prevent the expenditure from being regarded as incurred in the earlier year. The Special Leave Petition was permitted to be withdrawn in view of the statement that the petitioner could avail the benefit for the assessment year 2005-2006. en-us Tue, 09 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 May 2026 11:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751324 Commission paid to a managing director was treated as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure, with the revenue authority's method upheld on the basis that the payment had been shown as expenditure and received by the beneficiary in the subsequent assessment year. The court also noted that the fact that the liability was ratified only after the board meeting did not prevent the expenditure from being regarded as incurred in the earlier year. The Special Leave Petition was permitted to be withdrawn in view of the statement that the petitioner could avail the benefit for the assessment year 2005-2006. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751324