1.          M/s HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD (Supreme Court)

SC held that when the High Court has remitted the matter to the Transfer Pricing Officer from whose Order an appeal is pending before the CIT (A), it would be in the interest of both sides to resort to Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism suggested in the Budget of 2009 (See Sec.144-C of the Income Tax Act, 1961).

(Click here for judgment)

2.  M/s MAJESTIC AUTO LTD (Punjab & Haryana High Court)

The expenditure was of a revenue nature because the expenditure had direct    nexus with the existing business carried on by the assessee. May be, the expenditure as abortive but its character as a revenue expenditure incurred for the purpose of expansion of existing business would not change.

(Click here for judgment)

If you have any query please e-mail at voiceofca@gmail.com.

"Try to discover
The road to success
And you'll seek but never find,
But blaze your own path
And the road to success
Will trail right behind"

Thanks for your valuable time

"Voice of CA"