Held  that when the tax authorities scrutinised the claim of high ratio of refund to tax deducted at source, the substantial question involved should be the examination of those heads of receipts wherein credit for tax deducted at source was sought to be adjusted against the income and refund claim. The tax liability of the assessee was Rs. 59,48,694 and advance tax of Rs. 56,00,000 was paid and there was tax deducted at source of Rs. 26,06,769. If scrutiny for high ratio of refund to tax deducted at source were held to entitle the Assessing Officer to examine even expenditure which had no relationship with the tax deducted at source, that would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer to do complete scrutiny of all expenses in a limited scrutiny and thus circumvent the provisions which required mandatory approval of the competent authority to convert limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny. No reason was cited as to how the tax deducted at source credit shown in the return had impact on the expenditure and would affect the refund of the assessee. The very exercise of jurisdiction to examine the disputed expenses under limited scrutiny on the ground of “high ratio of refund to tax deducted at source”, was vitiated and that made all the additions illegal. Tribunal also held that expenses paid to legal and professionals for opinion about legal and tax consequences of  prospective investment is allowable as revenue expenditure  Expenses for promotion of  business of  Online gaming by providing gaming gears to Gamers and promoting E-Sports in India  is allowable as business expenditure.  (AY.2015-16)