2015 (11) TMI 496

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n holding that Product Registration expenses are revenue in nature when the Product Registration expenses made to Drug Regulatory Authorities in various countries give enduring benefit of exporting the registered drugs for many years? Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in holding that Trademark Registration fee and Patent fee (Rs.37,92,606/- and 15,49,880/-) are revenue expense .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ria, Adv. Ms. Srishti Rani, Adv. ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. 3. The revenue aggrieved by the refusal of the High Court to frame certain questions of law for consideration in the appeal(s) filed by it before the High Court under Section 260A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 has filed the instant appeals. The questions refused to be framed by the High Court are substantially similar and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... red for registration of Trademark in that country and also for registration of Patent, which are intangible assets under section 32(1)(ii) of the Act? D. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in holding that the expenses incurred outside the approved R & D facility would also get weighted deduction based on the word under "on in house" interpreting contradictorily to t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X