https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433839 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the expenditure claimed as revenue expenditure for securing a non-transferable right and license to use a trademark was not capital in nature. The Tribunal held that the payment was for a license and did not result in the acquisition of an intangible asset. Therefore, the disallowance of the expenditure was deemed erroneous, and the addition made by the Revenue Authorities was deleted. en-us Thu, 09 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2023 09:44:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433839 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the expenditure claimed as revenue expenditure for securing a non-transferable right and license to use a trademark was not capital in nature. The Tribunal held that the payment was for a license and did not result in the acquisition of an intangible asset. Therefore, the disallowance of the expenditure was deemed erroneous, and the addition made by the Revenue Authorities was deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433839