https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9815 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue regarding the classification of deferred revenue expenditure, stating it should not be considered as revenue expenditure for the assessment year. However, the court ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the validity of Form No. 6 signed by the accountant, emphasizing that lack of initial authorization could be rectified by submitting a letter of authority within four weeks. The court provided detailed analysis on both issues, ultimately disposing of the reference. en-us Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jul 2009 17:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9815 The court ruled in favor of the Revenue regarding the classification of deferred revenue expenditure, stating it should not be considered as revenue expenditure for the assessment year. However, the court ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the validity of Form No. 6 signed by the accountant, emphasizing that lack of initial authorization could be rectified by submitting a letter of authority within four weeks. The court provided detailed analysis on both issues, ultimately disposing of the reference. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9815