https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212386 The court upheld the ITAT's decision regarding the deduction under Section 35AB, emphasizing that technical knowhow expenditure is allowable even if goods are manufactured through a third party under direct supervision. The court did not entertain the issue of trademark expenditure under Section 35A, leaving it open for future consideration. The question on the allowability of interest paid on borrowed funds under Section 36(1)(iii) was not entertained as it was settled by a Supreme Court decision, leading to the appeal being disposed of with no costs. en-us Wed, 14 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212386 The court upheld the ITAT's decision regarding the deduction under Section 35AB, emphasizing that technical knowhow expenditure is allowable even if goods are manufactured through a third party under direct supervision. The court did not entertain the issue of trademark expenditure under Section 35A, leaving it open for future consideration. The question on the allowability of interest paid on borrowed funds under Section 36(1)(iii) was not entertained as it was settled by a Supreme Court decision, leading to the appeal being disposed of with no costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 14 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212386