Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC determined that a company engaged in manufacturing, incurring expenditure on scientific research and in-house R&D facility approved by the competent authority, is eligible for a 200% deduction under Section 35(2AB)(1). The court rejected the argument of "work-in-progress" as a disqualifying factor, noting the statutory provision only speaks of "expenditure" without distinguishing between completed and ongoing research. The petitioner was entitled to claim benefits for the actual year of expenditure incurrence, particularly given the reliance on prior advisory guidance. The court found in favor of the petitioner, allowing the deduction claim for scientific research expenditure.
HC determined that a company engaged in manufacturing, incurring expenditure on scientific research and in-house R&D facility approved by the competent authority, is eligible for a 200% deduction under Section 35(2AB)(1). The court rejected the argument of "work-in-progress" as a disqualifying factor, noting the statutory provision only speaks of "expenditure" without distinguishing between completed and ongoing research. The petitioner was entitled to claim benefits for the actual year of expenditure incurrence, particularly given the reliance on prior advisory guidance. The court found in favor of the petitioner, allowing the deduction claim for scientific research expenditure.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
