https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120505 The tribunal upheld the disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for transponder/uplinking charges, deeming them 'royalty' for services. It restored matters concerning disallowed expenditure and depreciation on software development, Cinemax equipment, and computers back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, due to the improper admission of new evidence by the CIT(A) without referral to the Assessing Officer, violating rule 46A. The tribunal directed reconsideration of these issues, emphasizing compliance with procedural rules and proper assessment of business commencement dates. en-us Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 10 Dec 2023 19:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120505 The tribunal upheld the disallowance under section 40(a)(i) for transponder/uplinking charges, deeming them 'royalty' for services. It restored matters concerning disallowed expenditure and depreciation on software development, Cinemax equipment, and computers back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, due to the improper admission of new evidence by the CIT(A) without referral to the Assessing Officer, violating rule 46A. The tribunal directed reconsideration of these issues, emphasizing compliance with procedural rules and proper assessment of business commencement dates. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 10 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120505