https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221773 The HC upheld that expenditure on scientific research incurred outside the approved in-house R&D facility, such as clinical trials, regulatory approvals, and patent filings, qualifies for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB). The court rejected the Revenue's narrow interpretation of "in-house," recognizing that clinical trials and related activities cannot be confined to the approved laboratory. The explanation to section 35(2AB)(1) explicitly includes such expenditures, aiming to encourage scientific research. Segregation of expenses by the prescribed authority does not preclude deduction eligibility. The decision favored the assessee, allowing deduction for research expenses incurred outside the approved facility. en-us Wed, 20 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Aug 2025 15:52:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221773 The HC upheld that expenditure on scientific research incurred outside the approved in-house R&D facility, such as clinical trials, regulatory approvals, and patent filings, qualifies for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB). The court rejected the Revenue's narrow interpretation of "in-house," recognizing that clinical trials and related activities cannot be confined to the approved laboratory. The explanation to section 35(2AB)(1) explicitly includes such expenditures, aiming to encourage scientific research. Segregation of expenses by the prescribed authority does not preclude deduction eligibility. The decision favored the assessee, allowing deduction for research expenses incurred outside the approved facility. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221773