https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17651 The court ruled in favor of the assessee on all three issues presented in the case. Firstly, it affirmed that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal can consider contentions raised by the assessee under rule 27. Secondly, it determined that the expenditure for acquiring designs and drawings was of revenue nature, not capital, as it provided short-lived benefits due to rapid technological advancements. Lastly, the court agreed that the acquired designs and drawings did not offer enduring benefits, as they were overshadowed by technological progress. en-us Tue, 17 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:28:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17651 The court ruled in favor of the assessee on all three issues presented in the case. Firstly, it affirmed that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal can consider contentions raised by the assessee under rule 27. Secondly, it determined that the expenditure for acquiring designs and drawings was of revenue nature, not capital, as it provided short-lived benefits due to rapid technological advancements. Lastly, the court agreed that the acquired designs and drawings did not offer enduring benefits, as they were overshadowed by technological progress. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17651