https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284054 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in both issues. The disallowance of Rs. 50.84 Crores for development rights was considered a revenue expenditure for commercial expediency, not capital in nature. The Tribunal directed the AO to treat it as revenue expenditure. Additionally, the deletion of Rs. 114.84 Crores on account of revenue recognition from the Fantasia building project was upheld, acknowledging legal constraints that prevented revenue recognition in the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal affirmed the appellant's decision to defer revenue recognition until the legal issues were resolved. en-us Fri, 31 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Oct 2019 18:24:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284054 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in both issues. The disallowance of Rs. 50.84 Crores for development rights was considered a revenue expenditure for commercial expediency, not capital in nature. The Tribunal directed the AO to treat it as revenue expenditure. Additionally, the deletion of Rs. 114.84 Crores on account of revenue recognition from the Fantasia building project was upheld, acknowledging legal constraints that prevented revenue recognition in the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal affirmed the appellant's decision to defer revenue recognition until the legal issues were resolved. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284054