https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198517 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the treatment of machinery spares as capital expenditure, disallowing the claim of the assessee. In the case of disallowance of deduction under section 80IB(4), the tribunal allowed the assessee's claim based on a precedent set by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on the treatment of expenses on dies and tools as revenue expenditure, dismissing the revenue's appeal. The tribunal's decisions were based on thorough analysis of legal precedents and factual considerations, resulting in a partial allowance of the assessee's appeal and dismissal of the revenue's appeal. en-us Thu, 06 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Feb 2018 09:01:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198517 The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the treatment of machinery spares as capital expenditure, disallowing the claim of the assessee. In the case of disallowance of deduction under section 80IB(4), the tribunal allowed the assessee's claim based on a precedent set by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on the treatment of expenses on dies and tools as revenue expenditure, dismissing the revenue's appeal. The tribunal's decisions were based on thorough analysis of legal precedents and factual considerations, resulting in a partial allowance of the assessee's appeal and dismissal of the revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198517