https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327988 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals filed by the assessee and the AO. The Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee on the disallowance of royalty payment and AMP expenses, citing that they were at arm's length and not international transactions, respectively. However, the disallowance of deduction for additional excise duty payable by third-party manufacturers was upheld due to contingent liability. The Tribunal allowed the depreciation on marketing know-how, following precedent. Regarding the disallowance under Section 14A, the Tribunal reduced the disallowance to 2% of exempt income. en-us Wed, 18 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 May 2016 10:31:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327988 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals filed by the assessee and the AO. The Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee on the disallowance of royalty payment and AMP expenses, citing that they were at arm's length and not international transactions, respectively. However, the disallowance of deduction for additional excise duty payable by third-party manufacturers was upheld due to contingent liability. The Tribunal allowed the depreciation on marketing know-how, following precedent. Regarding the disallowance under Section 14A, the Tribunal reduced the disallowance to 2% of exempt income. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327988