<?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>2020 (11) TMI 951 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401196</link>
    <description>The court upheld the tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling that royalty payments for technical know-how and intellectual property constituted capital expenditure, not eligible for deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The court considered the enduring benefits received by the appellant and analyzed the agreement clauses, concluding that the expenditure provided lasting advantages, aligning it with capital expenditure principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2021 14:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 951 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401196</link>
      <description>The court upheld the tribunal&#039;s decision, ruling that royalty payments for technical know-how and intellectual property constituted capital expenditure, not eligible for deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The court considered the enduring benefits received by the appellant and analyzed the agreement clauses, concluding that the expenditure provided lasting advantages, aligning it with capital expenditure principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401196</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>