Maddi Venkataraman & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

229 ITR 534Supreme Court of India1998#1573 most cited

What is Maddi Venkataraman & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure incurred for a purpose prohibited by law or in violation of another statute is not deductible as business expenditure under Section 37(1) as it is against public policy. The Explanation to Section 37 reinforces that such expenditure is deemed not for business.

72

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Maddi Venkataraman & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT · Section 37(1) · Explanation to Section 37 · business expenditure · deduction disallowed · expenditure prohibited by law · illegal payments · public policy · commercial expediency

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 127Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3A)Section 143(3B)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

explanation to section 37section 153a proceedingsprohibited by lawsection 158bdgoing concernbusiness expediencysection 246section 30commercial expediencysection 246achange of opinionsection 149

Judgments citing Maddi Venkataraman & Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1008/BANG/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.767 to 771/Bang/2014 (Assessment years: 2007-08 to 2011-12) AND ITA Nos.1008 & 1009/Bang/2015 (Assessment year: 2004-05 & 2007-08) M/s.ILC Industries Ltd. D 6/7, Near Industrial Estate, Dam Road, Hospet-583203 … Appellant PAN:AABCI0361A Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 11(4), Bangalore. … Respondent Appellant by : Zain Ahmed Khan, CA. Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 20/07/2016 Date of pronouncement : 20/09/2016 O R D…

M/S Ilc Industries Ltd., Hospet vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 767/BANG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Zain Ahmed Khan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40aSection 80Section 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.767 to 771/Bang/2014 (Assessment years: 2007-08 to 2011-12) AND ITA Nos.1008 & 1009/Bang/2015 (Assessment year: 2004-05 & 2007-08) M/s.ILC Industries Ltd. D 6/7, Near Industrial Estate, Dam Road, Hospet-583203 … Appellant PAN:AABCI0361A Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 11(4), Bangalore. … Respondent Appellant by : Zain Ahmed Khan, CA. Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 20/07/2016 Date of pronouncement : 20/09/2016 O R D…

ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Acytelene Trexim (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1429/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…e SCRA and thus was illegal contract by virtue of the provision of the SCRA. Such illegal loss cannot be adjusted with the legal income. In this regard, reliance may be placed on Apex Court's decision in Maddi Venkataraman and Company Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 534(SC) wherein it was held that infraction of law is not a normal incidence of business.” That the transaction is illegal, has been conceded by the appellant in the submission before the Ld. CIT(A). Vide Page 3 of the Appellate Order, the relevant portion of the appellant's submission is quoted as follows: "The AO has raised a number of other norms…

Purshottam Budhwani, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 304/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.302/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 The Acit, Central Circle बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. 41, Room No. 655, 6 Th Budhwani, B-2, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Himalaya Society, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 Milind Nagar Asalfa, 020. Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400 084. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.303/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-2006 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…es pertaining to such illegal activity cannot be allowed as business expenditure. On the other hand, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions:- “reliance is placed on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in Maddi “Venkatraman and Co. P.L. vs. CIT 229 ITR 534 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of the assessee is illegal and that the income is sought to be taxed by the ITO then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will also have to be allowed as deductions. In my case you have mentioned that entire modus operandi of making multiple IPO applications is i…

Purshottam Budhwani, Mumbai vs. ITO, 25(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 303/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.302/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 The Acit, Central Circle बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. 41, Room No. 655, 6 Th Budhwani, B-2, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Himalaya Society, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 Milind Nagar Asalfa, 020. Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400 084. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.303/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-2006 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…es pertaining to such illegal activity cannot be allowed as business expenditure. On the other hand, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions:- “reliance is placed on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in Maddi “Venkatraman and Co. P.L. vs. CIT 229 ITR 534 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of the assessee is illegal and that the income is sought to be taxed by the ITO then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will also have to be allowed as deductions. In my case you have mentioned that entire modus operandi of making multiple IPO applications is i…

Purshottam Budhwani, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 302/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.302/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 The Acit, Central Circle बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. 41, Room No. 655, 6 Th Budhwani, B-2, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Himalaya Society, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 Milind Nagar Asalfa, 020. Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400 084. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.303/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-2006 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…es pertaining to such illegal activity cannot be allowed as business expenditure. On the other hand, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions:- “reliance is placed on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in Maddi “Venkatraman and Co. P.L. vs. CIT 229 ITR 534 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of the assessee is illegal and that the income is sought to be taxed by the ITO then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will also have to be allowed as deductions. In my case you have mentioned that entire modus operandi of making multiple IPO applications is i…

ACIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai vs. Purshottam G Budhwani, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 205/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.302/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 The Acit, Central Circle बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. 41, Room No. 655, 6 Th Budhwani, B-2, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Himalaya Society, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 Milind Nagar Asalfa, 020. Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400 084. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.303/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-2006 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…es pertaining to such illegal activity cannot be allowed as business expenditure. On the other hand, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions:- “reliance is placed on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in Maddi “Venkatraman and Co. P.L. vs. CIT 229 ITR 534 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of the assessee is illegal and that the income is sought to be taxed by the ITO then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will also have to be allowed as deductions. In my case you have mentioned that entire modus operandi of making multiple IPO applications is i…

ACIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai vs. Purshottam G Budhwani, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 204/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.302/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 The Acit, Central Circle बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. 41, Room No. 655, 6 Th Budhwani, B-2, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Himalaya Society, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 Milind Nagar Asalfa, 020. Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400 084. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.303/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-2006 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…es pertaining to such illegal activity cannot be allowed as business expenditure. On the other hand, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions:- “reliance is placed on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in Maddi “Venkatraman and Co. P.L. vs. CIT 229 ITR 534 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of the assessee is illegal and that the income is sought to be taxed by the ITO then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will also have to be allowed as deductions. In my case you have mentioned that entire modus operandi of making multiple IPO applications is i…

ACIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai vs. Purshottam G Budhwani, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 203/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.302/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 The Acit, Central Circle बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. 41, Room No. 655, 6 Th Budhwani, B-2, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Himalaya Society, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 Milind Nagar Asalfa, 020. Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400 084. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.303/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-2006 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…es pertaining to such illegal activity cannot be allowed as business expenditure. On the other hand, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions:- “reliance is placed on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in Maddi “Venkatraman and Co. P.L. vs. CIT 229 ITR 534 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of the assessee is illegal and that the income is sought to be taxed by the ITO then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will also have to be allowed as deductions. In my case you have mentioned that entire modus operandi of making multiple IPO applications is i…

ACIT Cen Cir 41, Mumbai vs. Purshottam G Budhwani, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed in part, whereas appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 202/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhआमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.302/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.202/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2004-2005 The Acit, Central Circle बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. 41, Room No. 655, 6 Th Budhwani, B-2, Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Himalaya Society, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 Milind Nagar Asalfa, 020. Ghatkopar (W), Mumbai – 400 084. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.303/Mum/2012 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2005-2006 बिाम/ Shri Purshottam G. The Acit, Central Circle Budhwani, B-2, Himalaya 41, Room No. 655, 6Th Vs. Society, Milind Nagar Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Asalfa, Ghatkopar (W), M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai – 400 084. 400 020. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Adgpb8380D (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…es pertaining to such illegal activity cannot be allowed as business expenditure. On the other hand, the assessee has relied upon the following decisions:- “reliance is placed on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in Maddi “Venkatraman and Co. P.L. vs. CIT 229 ITR 534 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of the assessee is illegal and that the income is sought to be taxed by the ITO then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will also have to be allowed as deductions. In my case you have mentioned that entire modus operandi of making multiple IPO applications is i…

JUDGEMENTopens in new window

ITA/11/2002HC Delhi07 Aug 2014
Section 111Section 37

…ls Ltd. (supra) requires reconsideration in view of decisions of other high courts as noticed in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jayaram Metal Industries, [2006] 286 ITR 403 (Kar) and Maddi Venkataraman & Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, [1998] 229 ITR 534 (SC). He submits that language of Explanation to Section 37 is quite clear and once it is held that the expenditure was incurred for any purpose, which was prohibited by law, the same is deemed not to be incurred for the purpose of business or profession. The said Explanation incorporates a deeming fiction, which must be given full effect…

Commissioner of Income Tax-XII vs. Hemant Surana

ITA/181/2013HC Delhi02 Dec 2013

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 37(1)

…Page 16 of 35 that the said act an offence or an expenditure incurred as or prohibited by law. 23. In MADDI VENKATARAMAN & CO. (P) LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (1998) 229 ITR 534 (SC), the Supreme Court ruled that where the entire business of an Assessee is illegal and income from such illegal business is sought to be taxed, then the expenditure incurred in the illegal activities will have to be allowed as a deduction but where the business is otherwise lawful but an Assessee resorts to unlawful means to augment hi…