9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: The judgment involves the following issues:
1. Allowance of compensation as revenue expenditure u/s Income Tax Appellate Tribunal decision. 2. Treatment of compensation as revenue expenditure despite capitalization in earlier assessment years. 3. Deletion of addition of interest and guarantee commission as business expenditure. 4. Justification of not charging interest u/s Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act. 5. Allowance of advertisement expenses as revenue expenditure under completed contract method. 6. Dispute regarding brokerage and commission against rental income under 'Income from house property'. a) Compensation Expenditure: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the compensation of Rs. 1,10,55,194 paid by the assessee to its clients as revenue expenditure. The question of law arises on whether this allowance was correct in law. b) Capitalization Issue: Another question arises on whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing the compensation as revenue expenditure despite the assessee capitalizing similar compensation in work in progress in earlier assessment years. c) Deletion of Addition: The Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 3,22,25,676 and Rs. 13,67,115 paid by the assessee to the bank as interest and guarantee commission, considering it as business expenditure. The issue is whether this deletion was legally justified. d) Interest Chargeability: The Tribunal held that interest under Section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act was not chargeable on the tax required to be deducted at source on rent paid by the assessee. This decision was made despite the assessee claiming credit of tax deducted by tenants in its return. The question is whether this decision was justified in law. e) Advertisement Expenses: Despite the assessee following the completed contract method of accounting, the Tribunal allowed advertisement expenses of Rs. 17,64,940 as revenue expenditure. The issue is whether this allowance was legally correct. f) Brokerage and Commission: A dispute arose regarding brokerage and commission of Rs. 29,48,875 paid to the assessee against rental income assessed under 'Income from house property'. The Revenue raised this issue, but a previous Division Bench decision dismissed a similar appeal, stating no substantial question of law had arisen. Separate Judgment Highlight: The judgment does not mention any separate judgment delivered by the judges.
|
