Court held that in the present case, the assessee has not discharged the onus of establishing that the expenditure was wholly or exclusively incurred for the purposes mentioned in S. 35B(1)(b)(iv) of the Act. The Tribunal fell in error in holding otherwise. This question is answered in the negative, in favour of the Revenue, and against the assessee. (C. No. 71 of 1993, dt. 01.05.2018) ( AY.1984-85)
CIT v. K.C.P Ltd ( 2018) 409 ITR 436(AP)(HC),www.itatonlin.org
S. 35B :Export markets development allowance –Agent- Expenditure incurred in the promotion of the sale outside India – Not discharged the onus of establishing that the expenditure was wholly or exclusively incurred for the purposes mentioned in S.35-B(1)(b)(iv) of the Act- Not entitle to weighted deduction . [ S.35B(1)(b) (iv) ]