https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63245 The Tribunal remanded the valuation of work in progress for equipment supply and inland transportation because the figures and contractual nexus needed fresh verification. Expenditure on temporary bridges and bypass roads was allowed as revenue expenditure since the works were temporary, used only for contract execution, and gave no enduring capital advantage. On treaty interpretation, head office expenses remained subject to section 44C because the Japan DTAA did not expressly exclude domestic law, and the specified disallowance provisions under the Income-tax Act also continued to apply absent a contrary treaty provision. en-us Thu, 19 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Jan 2011 16:38:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63245 The Tribunal remanded the valuation of work in progress for equipment supply and inland transportation because the figures and contractual nexus needed fresh verification. Expenditure on temporary bridges and bypass roads was allowed as revenue expenditure since the works were temporary, used only for contract execution, and gave no enduring capital advantage. On treaty interpretation, head office expenses remained subject to section 44C because the Japan DTAA did not expressly exclude domestic law, and the specified disallowance provisions under the Income-tax Act also continued to apply absent a contrary treaty provision. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63245