<?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>2002 (7) TMI 220 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57767</link>
    <description>Provision for warranty was held to be an accrued and certain liability embedded in sale price; only quantification was estimated on past experience, so it was not a contingent liability and the deduction was allowed, subject to ensuring no double deduction on actual outgo. Travelling expense disallowance under r. 6D was sustained at a lump sum since the assessee sought ad hoc computation and enhanced limits were inapplicable for the year, so partial disallowance remained. For s. 80-IA, direct costs were to be directly attributed and common/indirect costs reasonably allocated on wages/sales; the AO was directed to accept the assessee&#039;s computation, allowing the deduction. Compensation and information-transition payments were held revenue (no asset/enduring benefit) and allowed. Payment to a foreign collaborator was allowed 50% as revenue and 50% treated as capital. For s. 80HHE, &quot;total turnover&quot; was confined to software/technical-services turnover, excluding unrelated turnover, and recomputation was directed. For s. 80-O read with s. 80AB, only direct expenses could be reduced; no estimated offshore expenses were permitted, and deduction was directed accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Dec 2025 17:02:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=96226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (7) TMI 220 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57767</link>
      <description>Provision for warranty was held to be an accrued and certain liability embedded in sale price; only quantification was estimated on past experience, so it was not a contingent liability and the deduction was allowed, subject to ensuring no double deduction on actual outgo. Travelling expense disallowance under r. 6D was sustained at a lump sum since the assessee sought ad hoc computation and enhanced limits were inapplicable for the year, so partial disallowance remained. For s. 80-IA, direct costs were to be directly attributed and common/indirect costs reasonably allocated on wages/sales; the AO was directed to accept the assessee&#039;s computation, allowing the deduction. Compensation and information-transition payments were held revenue (no asset/enduring benefit) and allowed. Payment to a foreign collaborator was allowed 50% as revenue and 50% treated as capital. For s. 80HHE, &quot;total turnover&quot; was confined to software/technical-services turnover, excluding unrelated turnover, and recomputation was directed. For s. 80-O read with s. 80AB, only direct expenses could be reduced; no estimated offshore expenses were permitted, and deduction was directed accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>