https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212852 The court ruled in favor of the revenue regarding the deductibility of interest paid to Noida Authority, stating it was not deductible under Section 36(1)(iii) or Section 37(1) as it was part of capital expenditure. However, the court allowed the bonus paid to directors under Section 36(1)(ii), emphasizing it was for services rendered, not a disguised dividend. Additionally, the court held that payments to franchisees were not subject to TDS under Section 194C, making Section 40(a)(ia) inapplicable. Lastly, the non-compete fee was treated as revenue expenditure and deemed deductible. en-us Thu, 19 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Nov 2015 18:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212852 The court ruled in favor of the revenue regarding the deductibility of interest paid to Noida Authority, stating it was not deductible under Section 36(1)(iii) or Section 37(1) as it was part of capital expenditure. However, the court allowed the bonus paid to directors under Section 36(1)(ii), emphasizing it was for services rendered, not a disguised dividend. Additionally, the court held that payments to franchisees were not subject to TDS under Section 194C, making Section 40(a)(ia) inapplicable. Lastly, the non-compete fee was treated as revenue expenditure and deemed deductible. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212852