https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269975 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the franchise fee payment made by the assessee for IPL franchise rights should be treated as revenue expenditure, not capital. The ITAT emphasized that the franchise right acquired was for conducting matches on a yearly basis, not a perpetual right, supporting its decision with legal precedents. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the classification of the expenditure as revenue based on the nature and duration of the rights acquired. en-us Wed, 28 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Dec 2015 16:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269975 The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the franchise fee payment made by the assessee for IPL franchise rights should be treated as revenue expenditure, not capital. The ITAT emphasized that the franchise right acquired was for conducting matches on a yearly basis, not a perpetual right, supporting its decision with legal precedents. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, affirming the classification of the expenditure as revenue based on the nature and duration of the rights acquired. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269975