https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761577 The ITAT Delhi upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of disallowances under sections 57(iii) and 37(1). For section 57(iii), the tribunal followed the Supreme Court precedent in Rajendra Prasad Moody, noting the assessee's legal dispute was related to income earning and the financial advisor's fee was justified. For section 37(1), the tribunal found the AO made adhoc disallowances without identifying specific problematic elements, while the assessee had substantiated the necessity and genuineness of business expenses. Both revenue grounds were dismissed, confirming the CIT(A)'s order allowing the claimed expenditures. en-us Wed, 09 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2024 10:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761577 The ITAT Delhi upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of disallowances under sections 57(iii) and 37(1). For section 57(iii), the tribunal followed the Supreme Court precedent in Rajendra Prasad Moody, noting the assessee's legal dispute was related to income earning and the financial advisor's fee was justified. For section 37(1), the tribunal found the AO made adhoc disallowances without identifying specific problematic elements, while the assessee had substantiated the necessity and genuineness of business expenses. Both revenue grounds were dismissed, confirming the CIT(A)'s order allowing the claimed expenditures. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761577