https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181617 Royalty paid for non-exclusive use of a holding company's logo was treated as revenue expenditure because it conferred only a non-transferable right of user and no enduring asset. Section 14A disallowance for assessment year 2007-08 was confined without applying Rule 8D, which was held applicable only from assessment year 2008-09, and the computation was corrected for an arithmetical error. Provision for ex-gratia was accepted as an ascertained liability where services had been rendered and part payment made. Amounts transferred to statutory reserve, bad debts and MAT-related adjustments were allowed following earlier tribunal precedent. Diminution in value of government securities and loss on derivative contracts were also accepted as allowable business deductions. en-us Mon, 10 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181617 Royalty paid for non-exclusive use of a holding company's logo was treated as revenue expenditure because it conferred only a non-transferable right of user and no enduring asset. Section 14A disallowance for assessment year 2007-08 was confined without applying Rule 8D, which was held applicable only from assessment year 2008-09, and the computation was corrected for an arithmetical error. Provision for ex-gratia was accepted as an ascertained liability where services had been rendered and part payment made. Amounts transferred to statutory reserve, bad debts and MAT-related adjustments were allowed following earlier tribunal precedent. Diminution in value of government securities and loss on derivative contracts were also accepted as allowable business deductions. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 10 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181617