PCIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) (2022) 447 ITR 403 (Ker.)(HC) PCIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2022) 447 ITR 431 (Ker.)(HC) Editorial: SLP of assessee dismissed, Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. PCIT (2022) 447 ITR 8 (St)(SC)

S. 35 : Scientific research expenditure-Expenditure towards clinical trials for availing of facility of its subsidiary abroad and at facility not approved by prescribed authority-Weighted deduction not allowable. [S. 35(2AB)]

The assessee was engaged in the business of manufacture of an article or thing, i. e., tyres and tyres not included in the Eleventh Schedule and the assessee had claimed expenditure on scientific research towards clinical trials for availing of the facility of its subsidiary in Germany. The claim of the assessee did not satisfy the second and third limbs of section 35(2AB), i. e., expenditure of scientific research on in-house research and development facility. The expenditure was more in the nature of revenue expenditure and the expenditure was also incurred at a facility not approved by the prescribed authority. If such expenditure claimed by the assessee was allowed as weighted deduction then the words which have substantial meaning in section 35(2AB), i. e., in-house research and development facility as approved by the prescribed authority would become otiose. The assessee had failed to establish the essential requirements for claiming weighted deduction. (AY.2010-11)