https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155069 The ITAT held that know-how fees were revenue expenditure, not capital, as they did not confer an enduring benefit. Royalty payments were deemed reasonable under section 40A(2)(b) and remanded for further assessment. Repair expenses were sent back for fresh evaluation due to lack of evidence. Interest on income-tax refund was taxable. Software expenses were considered revenue expenditure. Bad debts written off were deductible. Interest under sections 234B and 234D was upheld. Lease rental payments were partially disallowed. Technical know-how fees were partially allowed as revenue expenditure. Building repair expenses were partly treated as revenue. Operating and license fees for software were considered revenue expenditure. The ITAT emphasized factual context and legal precedents in expense classification. en-us Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Aug 2013 11:57:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155069 The ITAT held that know-how fees were revenue expenditure, not capital, as they did not confer an enduring benefit. Royalty payments were deemed reasonable under section 40A(2)(b) and remanded for further assessment. Repair expenses were sent back for fresh evaluation due to lack of evidence. Interest on income-tax refund was taxable. Software expenses were considered revenue expenditure. Bad debts written off were deductible. Interest under sections 234B and 234D was upheld. Lease rental payments were partially disallowed. Technical know-how fees were partially allowed as revenue expenditure. Building repair expenses were partly treated as revenue. Operating and license fees for software were considered revenue expenditure. The ITAT emphasized factual context and legal precedents in expense classification. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155069