https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261779 The Court dismissed the Revenue's challenge on depreciation due to the lack of factual determination by the Assessing Officer regarding asset usage. Regarding revenue expenditure for technical knowhow, the Court upheld lower authorities' decisions that the payments did not confer enduring benefits, concluding they were not capital expenditure. The judgment highlighted the importance of factual assessments for depreciation claims and distinguishing between capital and revenue expenditures based on enduring benefits. en-us Fri, 03 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jul 2015 06:38:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261779 The Court dismissed the Revenue's challenge on depreciation due to the lack of factual determination by the Assessing Officer regarding asset usage. Regarding revenue expenditure for technical knowhow, the Court upheld lower authorities' decisions that the payments did not confer enduring benefits, concluding they were not capital expenditure. The judgment highlighted the importance of factual assessments for depreciation claims and distinguishing between capital and revenue expenditures based on enduring benefits. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 03 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261779