https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467723 Final rate difference paid for milk procurement was treated as allowable business expenditure, not a distribution of profit, because the same claim had already been accepted in the assessee's own earlier years and no distinguishing facts were shown; the disallowance was deleted. Balance additional depreciation was also allowed in the succeeding year where the asset was used for less than 180 days in the year of acquisition, following the same view taken in earlier years; that disallowance was likewise deleted. The Revenue's appeal failed on both substantive issues and the relief granted below was upheld. en-us Mon, 26 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Mar 2026 13:12:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467723 Final rate difference paid for milk procurement was treated as allowable business expenditure, not a distribution of profit, because the same claim had already been accepted in the assessee's own earlier years and no distinguishing facts were shown; the disallowance was deleted. Balance additional depreciation was also allowed in the succeeding year where the asset was used for less than 180 days in the year of acquisition, following the same view taken in earlier years; that disallowance was likewise deleted. The Revenue's appeal failed on both substantive issues and the relief granted below was upheld. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 26 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467723