https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88369 HC rejected the assessee's claim for expenditure under 'debtors' head, finding insufficient evidence to support alleged trade practice of cash discounts. The Tribunal's findings were upheld, determining that the payments included non-revenue items like loan repayments and investments. The court concluded that without substantive proof of legitimate business expenditure, the original assessment stands. Appeals under Section 260A were dismissed, with questions answered in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, affirming the Tribunal's original determination of non-allowable expenditure. en-us Wed, 14 May 2025 07:48:07 +0530 Wed, 14 May 2025 07:48:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88369 HC rejected the assessee's claim for expenditure under 'debtors' head, finding insufficient evidence to support alleged trade practice of cash discounts. The Tribunal's findings were upheld, determining that the payments included non-revenue items like loan repayments and investments. The court concluded that without substantive proof of legitimate business expenditure, the original assessment stands. Appeals under Section 260A were dismissed, with questions answered in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, affirming the Tribunal's original determination of non-allowable expenditure. Highlights Income Tax Wed, 14 May 2025 07:48:07 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=88369