https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266001 The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee, directing the Assessing Officer to permit the project development expenses as revenue expenditure for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The Tribunal disagreed with the Assessing Officer's view that the expenses were capital in nature, emphasizing that the expenses were incurred for routine operations and were revenue in nature, aligning with legal precedents. The Tribunal found the expenses to be for the expansion of an established business, overturning the CIT(A)'s decision and ruling in favor of the assessee. en-us Wed, 09 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Oct 2015 08:15:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266001 The Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee, directing the Assessing Officer to permit the project development expenses as revenue expenditure for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The Tribunal disagreed with the Assessing Officer's view that the expenses were capital in nature, emphasizing that the expenses were incurred for routine operations and were revenue in nature, aligning with legal precedents. The Tribunal found the expenses to be for the expansion of an established business, overturning the CIT(A)'s decision and ruling in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266001