<?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>2003 (8) TMI 171 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60700</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the payment of Rs. 2 lakhs made by the assessee to M/s. Wise Men&#039;s Consultancy Co. (P.) Ltd. for training materials and tools necessary for conducting training courses constituted revenue expenditure. However, a separate opinion by the Judicial Member considered the payment as capital expenditure for acquiring a right to conduct the commercial activities of another company. The matter was referred to a Third Member, who concluded that the payment aimed to avoid competition and acquire an enduring benefit, thus classifying it as capital expenditure. Consequently, the payment was deemed as capital expenditure, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 16:53:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=99147" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (8) TMI 171 - ITAT CALCUTTA-E</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60700</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the payment of Rs. 2 lakhs made by the assessee to M/s. Wise Men&#039;s Consultancy Co. (P.) Ltd. for training materials and tools necessary for conducting training courses constituted revenue expenditure. However, a separate opinion by the Judicial Member considered the payment as capital expenditure for acquiring a right to conduct the commercial activities of another company. The matter was referred to a Third Member, who concluded that the payment aimed to avoid competition and acquire an enduring benefit, thus classifying it as capital expenditure. Consequently, the payment was deemed as capital expenditure, and the assessee&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60700</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>