https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755126 A claim for provision for loss in investment was treated as inadmissible because it concerned diminution in the value of capital investments and did not qualify as revenue expenditure, depreciation, or deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The issue was held not debatable, so its non-disallowance in the original assessment was regarded as a mistake apparent from the record. Rectification under section 154 was therefore held valid, and the disallowance was restored. en-us Thu, 04 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jul 2024 07:52:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755126 A claim for provision for loss in investment was treated as inadmissible because it concerned diminution in the value of capital investments and did not qualify as revenue expenditure, depreciation, or deduction under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The issue was held not debatable, so its non-disallowance in the original assessment was regarded as a mistake apparent from the record. Rectification under section 154 was therefore held valid, and the disallowance was restored. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 04 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755126