https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795182 Expiry of the limitation period for enforcing a trading liability does not by itself trigger Section 41(1), because it bars the creditor's remedy without extinguishing the underlying liability. Section 41(1) requires remission or cessation of the liability and a resulting benefit to the assessee; creditor confirmation further supported the continuing liability. The addition for alleged cessation was therefore deleted. Ad hoc disallowance of hotel and travelling expenditure was also impermissible under applicable coordinate-bench decisions, and that disallowance was deleted. Both additions were deleted in favour of the assessee. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jul 2026 08:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795182 Expiry of the limitation period for enforcing a trading liability does not by itself trigger Section 41(1), because it bars the creditor's remedy without extinguishing the underlying liability. Section 41(1) requires remission or cessation of the liability and a resulting benefit to the assessee; creditor confirmation further supported the continuing liability. The addition for alleged cessation was therefore deleted. Ad hoc disallowance of hotel and travelling expenditure was also impermissible under applicable coordinate-bench decisions, and that disallowance was deleted. Both additions were deleted in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795182