https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38143 The High Court of Karnataka ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It held that the land purchased should be considered an asset of the undertaking for section 80J relief calculation, emphasizing that the actual cost of the land should be included. Additionally, the payment to a Swiss company for technical know-how was deemed as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure, based on its essential nature for profit-making activities. The Court's decision was guided by legal provisions and precedents, ensuring a fair assessment of tax implications for the assessee. en-us Fri, 21 Apr 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Apr 2010 13:41:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38143 The High Court of Karnataka ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues. It held that the land purchased should be considered an asset of the undertaking for section 80J relief calculation, emphasizing that the actual cost of the land should be included. Additionally, the payment to a Swiss company for technical know-how was deemed as revenue expenditure rather than capital expenditure, based on its essential nature for profit-making activities. The Court's decision was guided by legal provisions and precedents, ensuring a fair assessment of tax implications for the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 21 Apr 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38143