https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768415 The Madras HC ruled on multiple issues for the assessee company. For advertisement expenditure through MRF Pace Foundation, the court held it was allowable business expenditure, not charity, as the foundation was part of the assessee entity. Regarding reassessment validity, the court found AY 2002-03 proceedings barred by limitation due to full disclosure in original returns, but upheld jurisdiction for AY 2004-05 under Section 147. For Section 80HHC deductions, retrospective amendments applied only from AY 2005-06 onwards, favoring the assessee for earlier years. The court allowed Section 80IA/80IB deductions for rubber manufacturing units, finding the denial misconceived given consistent prior allowances. en-us Wed, 06 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Apr 2025 08:32:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768415 The Madras HC ruled on multiple issues for the assessee company. For advertisement expenditure through MRF Pace Foundation, the court held it was allowable business expenditure, not charity, as the foundation was part of the assessee entity. Regarding reassessment validity, the court found AY 2002-03 proceedings barred by limitation due to full disclosure in original returns, but upheld jurisdiction for AY 2004-05 under Section 147. For Section 80HHC deductions, retrospective amendments applied only from AY 2005-06 onwards, favoring the assessee for earlier years. The court allowed Section 80IA/80IB deductions for rubber manufacturing units, finding the denial misconceived given consistent prior allowances. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 06 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768415