https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380280 The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's order for AY 2010-11. The Court upheld the treatment of airfare, entry tax, and software expenses as revenue expenditure based on precedents. Additionally, the Court rejected the addition under Section 14A, following the Cheminvest Ltd. case. The dispute over royalty and lump sum fee payments was settled in favor of the assessee, with the Court supporting the ITAT's reasoning for treating the expenses as revenue expenditure. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the ITAT's decision on distinguishing between capital and revenue expenditure for royalty payments. en-us Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 May 2019 11:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380280 The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the ITAT's order for AY 2010-11. The Court upheld the treatment of airfare, entry tax, and software expenses as revenue expenditure based on precedents. Additionally, the Court rejected the addition under Section 14A, following the Cheminvest Ltd. case. The dispute over royalty and lump sum fee payments was settled in favor of the assessee, with the Court supporting the ITAT's reasoning for treating the expenses as revenue expenditure. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the ITAT's decision on distinguishing between capital and revenue expenditure for royalty payments. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380280