TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (4) TMI 998
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] is bad both in the eye of law & on facts. 2. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts & in law, in confirming the disallowance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed by his predecessor without there being any change in facts as well as in law. 4. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts & in law, in the alternate and without prejudice to the above the learned CIT(A) has erred in not allowing depreciation on the royalty expenditure considered capital under section 32(1) of the Act. (ii) In not considerin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....een held that expenditure on royalty is revenue in nature and allowable, by observing as under: "8. In sum and substance an overall consideration of the terms and clauses in the agreement between the assessee and the Carraro SpA, Italy, it is difficult to accept the contention of the A.O. that assessee has been granted absolute right of the use of the technology. While granting the limited right....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er the technical collaboration agreement is allowable as a revenue expenditure. The identical view has been taken in the different decisions. We have also considered the decisions relied on by the Ld. Counsel. More particularly, in the case of Fenner Woodroffe & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (Mad) 102 ITR 665. In the said case there was no limitation regarding exploitation of the knowhow beyond the term of the....