https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468778 Expenditure incurred to defend existing tenancy rights was treated as revenue expenditure because it was aimed at preserving a business asset and did not create a new capital advantage. Salary and related travelling expenses paid to the assessee's sons were disallowed because the record did not establish that they rendered actual business services or that the payments had a genuine business nexus. The assessee's own travel claim was allowed only to the extent business connection was shown for the Ahmedabad trip, while the USA trip lacked supporting evidence. Estimated disallowance of part of car, insurance and telephone expenses for alleged personal use was deleted for want of convincing material. en-us Fri, 07 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2026 19:00:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468778 Expenditure incurred to defend existing tenancy rights was treated as revenue expenditure because it was aimed at preserving a business asset and did not create a new capital advantage. Salary and related travelling expenses paid to the assessee's sons were disallowed because the record did not establish that they rendered actual business services or that the payments had a genuine business nexus. The assessee's own travel claim was allowed only to the extent business connection was shown for the Ahmedabad trip, while the USA trip lacked supporting evidence. Estimated disallowance of part of car, insurance and telephone expenses for alleged personal use was deleted for want of convincing material. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468778