S. 43A : Rate of exchange – Foreign currency – Business loss- Rate of Exchange of foreign currency – loss on settlement of forward contract – Held to be allowable .

S. 40A(2): Expenses or payments not deductible – Excessive or unreasonable – Discount and rate difference- Deletion is held to be justified .

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Capital or revenue-Expenditure on replacing machinery destroyed by fire — Expenditure on dies and tools — Allowable as revenue expenditure.

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Legal expenses —Defend its Directors and shareholders in individual capacities- Disallowance is held to be proper . [ S.260A ]

S.37(1): Business expenditure -Capital or revenue -Acquisition of non-transferable sub-licence – Allowable as revenue expenditure.

S.37(1): Business expenditure — Capital or revenue -Acquisition of technical know-how -Depreciation- Allowable as revenue expenditure . [ S.32(1) ]

S.32: Depreciation —Uninterrupted power supply system for Computers —Entitled to depreciation at 60 Per Cent.

S.28(i):Business loss —Fluctuation in rate of foreign exchange — Allowable as business loss . [ S.37(1) ]

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Charging certain goods and services – Not commercial activities – Onus on department to prove profit motive – No change in nature of activities from earlier years – Principle of consistency is applicable- Entitle to exemption [ S.2(15) 12 , 13 80G(5)(v)]

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure – Business income- Income from other sources – Interest income – Assessable as business income – Real income theory – Diversion by overriding title – Assessee for preceding years not claiming adjustments does not preclude right of assessee to make out case of mistake at a subsequent date- Disbursements of grants was held to be core business of appellant expenditure incurred in course of business and for purpose of business is allowable as deduction -Recommendation-
A Committee of legal experts presided by a retired Judge can give its imprimatur to the settlement -A vibrant system of Advance Ruling can go a long way in reducing taxation litigation.- This is true even of disputes between the taxation department and private persons, who are more than willing to comply with the law of the land but find some ambiguity- A council for Advance Tax Ruling based on the Swedish model and the New Zealand system may be a possible way forward. [ S.4, 28(i), 56 ]