https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262509 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the royalty payment made for the use of the brand name was a legitimate business expense under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The agreement between the parties for the transfer of assets and payment of royalty was deemed valid, with the individual retaining ownership of the brand name and licensing it to the company. The Tribunal emphasized the separate legal entity status of the company and dismissed the Assessing Officer's addition of the royalty payment as it was not a colorable device to reduce tax liability. en-us Fri, 07 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Aug 2015 06:52:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262509 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the royalty payment made for the use of the brand name was a legitimate business expense under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The agreement between the parties for the transfer of assets and payment of royalty was deemed valid, with the individual retaining ownership of the brand name and licensing it to the company. The Tribunal emphasized the separate legal entity status of the company and dismissed the Assessing Officer's addition of the royalty payment as it was not a colorable device to reduce tax liability. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262509