https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246231 The Tribunal held that the non-compete fee paid to the Executive Director should be considered a revenue expenditure, not a capital expenditure, as it did not provide an enduring benefit to the company. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s decision and directing the AO to treat the fee as a revenue expenditure. The order was pronounced on 28th February 2014. en-us Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Mar 2015 17:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246231 The Tribunal held that the non-compete fee paid to the Executive Director should be considered a revenue expenditure, not a capital expenditure, as it did not provide an enduring benefit to the company. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s decision and directing the AO to treat the fee as a revenue expenditure. The order was pronounced on 28th February 2014. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246231