https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209415 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decisions, dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. The payment of Rs. 1,56,87,500 to M/s. Yes Bank was considered capital expenditure under section 37(1), and the alternative claim for amortization of Rs. 3,93,78,491 under section 35D was rejected. The issue of interest under section 234B was deemed incidental and did not require specific adjudication. en-us Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Jul 2013 10:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209415 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decisions, dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. The payment of Rs. 1,56,87,500 to M/s. Yes Bank was considered capital expenditure under section 37(1), and the alternative claim for amortization of Rs. 3,93,78,491 under section 35D was rejected. The issue of interest under section 234B was deemed incidental and did not require specific adjudication. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209415