Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2020 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 975 - MADRAS HIGH COURTExpenditure as “Scientific Research Expenditure” u/s 35 - neither the project was approved by the Competent Authority, as required u/s 35 nor the payment in question was made to any approved organization for research purposes - whether Assessee was entitled to claim the said expenditure in the “Residuary Provisions” of Section 37? - HELD THAT:- The conditions required for claiming the same under Section 35 was not satisfied by the Assessee. Nonetheless, the Assessee was entitled to claim the said expenditure in the “Residuary Provisions” of Section 37. Section 37 permits such allowance of “Business Expenditure” incurred in the ordinary course of business, if they are not allowable otherwise by Section 30 to 36. Unless the expenditure is of the capital in nature, resulting in creation of assets of enduring nature, the same cannot be disallowed under Section 37. There is no dispute that the said expenditure was incurred in the ordinary course of business. No material on record which would indicate any capital expenditure incurred in the details of said sum by the Assessee. The redesigning of the moulds to create new designs of the components manufactured by the Assessee, to the satisfaction of the customer M/s. Hyundai Motors is nothing but 'Revenue Expenditure' incurred in the ordinary course of business of the Assessee. Therefore, finding of the CIT (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal are findings of fact, which cannot be said to be wrong or perverse in any manner. No substantial question of law.
|