<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1999 (12) TMI 26 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15043</link>
    <description>The High Court of Gujarat ruled in favor of the assessee, a company manufacturing motors and weighing machines, allowing the payment made towards royalty to collaborators as revenue expenditure. The court considered the agreements with foreign collaborators, emphasizing changes in obligations and entitlements. Despite the absence of a renewal clause in the original agreement, the court noted that the assessee retained technical know-how without additional payment under the amended agreement, indicating no enduring advantage. Citing relevant precedents, the court concluded that the expenditure qualified as revenue expenditure, ultimately supporting the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:05:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54043" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (12) TMI 26 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15043</link>
      <description>The High Court of Gujarat ruled in favor of the assessee, a company manufacturing motors and weighing machines, allowing the payment made towards royalty to collaborators as revenue expenditure. The court considered the agreements with foreign collaborators, emphasizing changes in obligations and entitlements. Despite the absence of a renewal clause in the original agreement, the court noted that the assessee retained technical know-how without additional payment under the amended agreement, indicating no enduring advantage. Citing relevant precedents, the court concluded that the expenditure qualified as revenue expenditure, ultimately supporting the assessee&#039;s position.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>