https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448300 The Madras HC ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding royalty payments for logo usage, the court held these constitute revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure, as the benefits were not enduring in nature and the expenditure wasn't essential to commence business operations. The assessee was entitled to 100% deduction instead of 25% depreciation treatment. Second, on Employee Stock Option Scheme expenses, the HC upheld the Tribunal's decision treating ESOP costs as allowable revenue expenditure, following precedent in CIT v. PVP Ventures Ltd. Both disallowances by the assessing officer were deleted. en-us Mon, 11 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jan 2024 16:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448300 The Madras HC ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding royalty payments for logo usage, the court held these constitute revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure, as the benefits were not enduring in nature and the expenditure wasn't essential to commence business operations. The assessee was entitled to 100% deduction instead of 25% depreciation treatment. Second, on Employee Stock Option Scheme expenses, the HC upheld the Tribunal's decision treating ESOP costs as allowable revenue expenditure, following precedent in CIT v. PVP Ventures Ltd. Both disallowances by the assessing officer were deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448300