9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (5) TMI 511 - HC - Income TaxExpenditure on advertisement and sales promotion - capital v/s revenue - Held that - Such an expenditure on account of advertisement and sales promotion is held by this court to be revenue in nature by answering this question in a batch of appeals with the lead case being entitled CIT v. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Ltd. 2011 (3) TMI 622 - Delhi High Court - Answered in favour of the assessee. Stamping fee, direct selling expenditure and commission payment - As per the judgment of this court in CIT v. Salora International Ltd. 2008 (8) TMI 138 - DELHI HIGH COURT the expenditure was required to be allowed as revenue/business expenditure incurred in that year - Decided in favour of assessee. Expenditure on lease hold improvements - The Assessing Officer took the view that the lease improvements were on account of renovation carried out in the lease premises and, therefore, had to be capitalised - Held that - As when in the earlier year also, the assessee had capitalised the same and claimed depreciation at 10 per cent. on it thus to be treated as capital expenditure and allowed depreciation at 10 per cent - This appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Issues:
1. Classification of expenditure on advertisement and sales promotion as revenue or deferred revenue expenditure. 2. Treatment of stamping fee, direct selling expenditure, and commission payment as revenue or capital expenditure. 3. Classification of expenditure on leasehold improvements as revenue or capital expenditure. Issue 1: The first issue in this case revolved around the classification of expenditure on advertisement and sales promotion by the Assessing Officer. The AO disallowed a portion of the expenditure, considering it as deferred revenue expenditure, based on the concept of enduring advantage to the assessee. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the entire expenditure should be treated as revenue expenditure. The ITAT emphasized that no part of the expenditure was identified as capital in nature by the Assessing Officer, leading to the conclusion that the entire claim made by the assessee should be allowed as revenue expenditure. The High Court, citing a previous judgment, affirmed that expenditure on advertisement and sales promotion is to be treated as business expenditure allowable under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, ultimately dismissing the appeal by the Revenue. Issue 2: The second issue involved the treatment of stamping fee, direct selling expenditure, and commission payment by the Assessing Officer. The AO spread the expenses over multiple years, considering the period of financing involved. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the ITAT disagreed, stating that the entire expenditure should be allowed in the year it was incurred. They emphasized that the expenditure was not dependent on the length of time or specific agreements, and had a direct nexus with the business activities of the assessee. The High Court concurred with the ITAT's view, holding that the expenditure should be allowed as revenue/business expenditure incurred in the relevant year, based on the clauses of the agreements and relevant case law. Issue 3: The final issue centered on the classification of expenditure on leasehold improvements. The Assessing Officer treated the expenditure as capital, considering it as renovation work that needed to be capitalized and depreciated. The High Court noted the detailed nature of the improvements, including various installations and civil works. Following the previous judgments and the principle that revenue expenditure is incurred for the purpose of the business, the High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the treatment of the leasehold improvements expenditure as capital expenditure. In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decisions of the lower authorities regarding the classification of various expenditures as revenue expenditure in alignment with the provisions of the Income-tax Act and established legal principles.
|
