https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420946 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, determining that the payment for technical know-how should be treated as revenue expenditure. It held that the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or enduring benefit from the license agreement, as it only had the right to use the technical know-how during the license period without the ability to sub-license or use it after termination. The Tribunal distinguished a cited Supreme Court decision based on the specific facts of the case, concluding that the entire royalty expenditure was revenue expenditure. en-us Thu, 31 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:08:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420946 The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, determining that the payment for technical know-how should be treated as revenue expenditure. It held that the assessee had not acquired any capital asset or enduring benefit from the license agreement, as it only had the right to use the technical know-how during the license period without the ability to sub-license or use it after termination. The Tribunal distinguished a cited Supreme Court decision based on the specific facts of the case, concluding that the entire royalty expenditure was revenue expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 31 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420946