Capital Expenditure

The DOT licence fee paid by assessee is not in the nature of capital expenditure falling under section 35ABB, but the same is revenue in nature, allowable under section 37(1) Full Article

In this case the ITAT has held that the agreements entered into by the assessee, viewed together in their entirety, pertain to a single transaction of purchase of assets. Accordingly, the amount paid for non-compete fees was considered to be for acquisition of a business and capital in nature. The ITAT has also observed that each case would need to be decided in the background of its peculiar facts and circumstances. Thus, if the facts in another case are different (e.g... Full Article

The expenditure covered u/s 35AB should be in the nature of capital expenditure because the scheme of the IT Act, 1961 is that all the revenue expenses are allowable while computing income from business or profession u/s 37(1). Full Article

It is not possible to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the Revenue that unless a particular asset is used for the purpose of business or provision, depreciation is not allowed. No doubt, as per Section 32(1) of the Act, in order to be entitled to claim depreciation, the asset is to be owned by the assessee and it is also to be used for the purpose of business or profession. However, the expression "used for the purpose of business" when applied to block a.. Full Article

It is quite common for the Revenue to treat such expenditure as capital in nature and administer depreciation allowance, only. An assessee would always put forth his argument that such replacement cost is only to maintain the existing level of efficiency of his manufacturing facility and would not result in any increase in its production capacity, thereby claiming it to be revenue in nature. In this context, it is quite pertinent to examine the current judicial thinking .. Full Article

The taxpayer was a wholly owned subsidiary of Denso Thermal Systems, Italy. The taxpayer was engaged in the business of manufacturing certain automobile products and selling the same in India and abroad. For the impugned assessment year, the taxpayer claimed that the royalty paid to its parent company as revenue expenditure. After perusing the details called for, the AO, relying on the decision of CIT vs. Southern Switchgear Ltd. 148 ITR 272 (Mad) held 25% of the royalty.. Full Article

It is well established position that Articles of a Company are constituent document and are binding on the Company and its Directors. As aforesaid, the intention of Article 57 is that the share capital of the Company remains within the close knit group and nothing more. On the plain language of the said provision and the intent behind it, the regime of Article 57 has no application to transfer of shares between member to member of the Company interest. There is force in .. Full Article

“There is no specific provision in Indian tax laws governing the deductibility of the payments made for acquiring spectrum,” a PwC report on the telecom sector said. With the allocation of spectrum, especially 3G being an issue of concern, rules governing the same in the taxation laws also assume significance. “Since, substantial amounts are to be involved for acquiring spectrum, determining its deductibility becomes critical,” the firm said. Full Article