https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65285 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on several issues, including the allowance of deductions under Section 80-IA for software duplication and exemption under Section 10A for the Software Development Center in Bangalore. It disallowed the invocation of Section 92 concerning royalty payments and allowed the provision for leave encashment. However, it upheld the disallowance of master copy expenditure as a capital expenditure. Interest charges under Sections 234A and 234B were deemed consequential, while interest under Section 234D was disallowed for the assessment year 2001-02. Penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were not pressed. Appeals were allowed or partly allowed accordingly. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 10 Dec 2023 13:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65285 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on several issues, including the allowance of deductions under Section 80-IA for software duplication and exemption under Section 10A for the Software Development Center in Bangalore. It disallowed the invocation of Section 92 concerning royalty payments and allowed the provision for leave encashment. However, it upheld the disallowance of master copy expenditure as a capital expenditure. Interest charges under Sections 234A and 234B were deemed consequential, while interest under Section 234D was disallowed for the assessment year 2001-02. Penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were not pressed. Appeals were allowed or partly allowed accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65285