https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783207 HC upheld the assessee's claim that the license fee paid for use of goodwill and the firm's name constituted allowable business expenditure u/s 37. It held that linking consideration to a percentage of the firm's revenue was merely a computational measure and did not amount to prohibited revenue sharing under the Bar Council Rules or the Advocates Act, 1961. The payment was characterized as consideration for exploiting goodwill, not for sharing professional fees. The HC distinguished the SC ruling in Apex Laboratories, noting that, unlike explicit statutory prohibitions applicable to medical practitioners, no comparable prohibition was violated here. The appeals were dismissed and decided in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Dec 2025 12:41:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783207 HC upheld the assessee's claim that the license fee paid for use of goodwill and the firm's name constituted allowable business expenditure u/s 37. It held that linking consideration to a percentage of the firm's revenue was merely a computational measure and did not amount to prohibited revenue sharing under the Bar Council Rules or the Advocates Act, 1961. The payment was characterized as consideration for exploiting goodwill, not for sharing professional fees. The HC distinguished the SC ruling in Apex Laboratories, noting that, unlike explicit statutory prohibitions applicable to medical practitioners, no comparable prohibition was violated here. The appeals were dismissed and decided in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783207