2011 (7) TMI 1212 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal of the revenue and cross objection of the assessee regarding the order of CIT(A)-LTU, New Delhi.

Ground No.1 - Lump sum fees and royalty: The appeal challenges the deletion of addition of lump sum fees and royalty. The Tribunal referred to previous orders favoring the assessee for similar issues, concluding that the learned CIT(A) did not err in deleting the disallowance. The ground was dismissed based on precedent.

Ground No.2 - Customs duty deduction: The issue concerns the deduction of customs duty paid on a provisional basis. The Tribunal held that the payment was deductible under section 43B, following a Special Bench decision. The Assessing Officer was directed not to grant relief in a subsequent year when the refunded amount was offered for taxation.

Ground No.3 - Entry tax disallowance: The ground challenges the deletion of entry tax disallowance. The Tribunal found no reason for the revenue to appeal as the payment was made provisionally and under protest, not constituting an ascertained liability.

Ground No.4 - Provision for warranty: The appeal contests the deletion of addition on account of provision for warranty. The Tribunal upheld the provision as an ascertained liability based on previous decisions, dismissing the ground.

Ground No.5 - Export commission deduction: The issue involves the deletion of addition in respect of export commission. The Tribunal allowed the deduction, following previous decisions, and dismissed the ground.

Ground No.6 - Technical guidance fee: The appeal challenges the deletion of addition for air fares and travel expenses forming part of technical guidance fee. The Tribunal upheld the deletion, considering the expenses as revenue expenditure based on previous findings.

Cross objection - Entry tax payment: The cross objection challenges the disallowance of entry tax payment. The Tribunal allowed the deduction under section 43B, emphasizing that the payment was made based on rules and regulations, and should be allowed on the basis of actual payment.

In conclusion, the appeal of the revenue was dismissed, and the cross objection of the assessee was allowed, with the Tribunal providing detailed reasoning for each issue involved in the judgment.