<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amendment.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102430</link>
    <description>Patent-settlement expenditure incurred under an out-of-court United States patent-infringement settlement is described as a revenue business deduction where it was compensatory, commercially expedient, and did not create a capital asset or enduring capital advantage. The notes state that, for the relevant year, Explanation 1 to section 37(1) did not cover alleged foreign-law contraventions, while Explanation 3 applied prospectively; consequential financing interest was also allowable. They further address deletion of captive-power and associated-enterprise transfer-pricing adjustments, restriction of exempt-income disallowance to exempt dividend without a book-profit adjustment, and verification of foreign-tax deductions. Software expenditure remained capital in character, while business-promotion expenditure required verification rather than ad hoc disallowance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:07 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915601" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amendment.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102430</link>
      <description>Patent-settlement expenditure incurred under an out-of-court United States patent-infringement settlement is described as a revenue business deduction where it was compensatory, commercially expedient, and did not create a capital asset or enduring capital advantage. The notes state that, for the relevant year, Explanation 1 to section 37(1) did not cover alleged foreign-law contraventions, while Explanation 3 applied prospectively; consequential financing interest was also allowable. They further address deletion of captive-power and associated-enterprise transfer-pricing adjustments, restriction of exempt-income disallowance to exempt dividend without a book-profit adjustment, and verification of foreign-tax deductions. Software expenditure remained capital in character, while business-promotion expenditure required verification rather than ad hoc disallowance.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 09:11:07 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102430</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>