<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (4) TMI 287 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77056</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal against the allowance of 100% Research and Development (R&amp;amp;D) expenditure for the assessment year 2005-06. The Court upheld the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing the genuineness of the expenditure, recognition of the R&amp;amp;D Department by the Ministry of Science and Technology, and adherence to the mercantile system of accounting by the assessee. With no substantial legal question identified, the Court concluded that the expenditure was valid under Section 35(1) of the Income-tax Act, highlighting the importance of factual findings and compliance with legal provisions in such cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 287 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77056</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal against the allowance of 100% Research and Development (R&amp;amp;D) expenditure for the assessment year 2005-06. The Court upheld the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing the genuineness of the expenditure, recognition of the R&amp;amp;D Department by the Ministry of Science and Technology, and adherence to the mercantile system of accounting by the assessee. With no substantial legal question identified, the Court concluded that the expenditure was valid under Section 35(1) of the Income-tax Act, highlighting the importance of factual findings and compliance with legal provisions in such cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>