Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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.