https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459879 The court partially allowed the appeal, directing the Assessing Officer (AO) to restrict the disallowance of expenses to 25%, thereby allowing 75% of the expenses claimed by the assessee. The court found that the expenses were genuine, incurred for professional purposes, and supported by evidence such as bank statements and vouchers. It dismissed the Revenue's argument that Section 28(v) is a deeming provision, affirming that expenses incurred for earning income under the head profits and gains of business or profession are allowable when substantiated by evidence. en-us Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jan 2025 18:56:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459879 The court partially allowed the appeal, directing the Assessing Officer (AO) to restrict the disallowance of expenses to 25%, thereby allowing 75% of the expenses claimed by the assessee. The court found that the expenses were genuine, incurred for professional purposes, and supported by evidence such as bank statements and vouchers. It dismissed the Revenue's argument that Section 28(v) is a deeming provision, affirming that expenses incurred for earning income under the head profits and gains of business or profession are allowable when substantiated by evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459879