9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (1) TMI 1534 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 35ABB - expenditure claimed by the assessee, for the concerned assessment year, could be treated as revenue - in the opinion of the AO the treatment had to be as falling in the capital stream - HELD THAT - ITAT followed its view for the previous years and held that the expenditure fell in the revenue stream; the ITAT was also guided by the decision of this Court, which had confirmed its previous view. This Court notices that the question sought to be urged with respect to the revenue treatment, was identical to the question framed in Commissioner of Income Tax. Vs. Bharti Hexacom Ltd. 2013 (12) TMI 1115 - DELHI HIGH COURT by a reasoned judgment, the Court dismissed the Revenue s appeal and confirmed the view taken by ITAT. As a consequence, no question of law arises. The appeal is therefore, dismissed.
Issues:
- Interpretation of Section 35 ABB for treatment of expenditure as revenue or capital. Analysis: The High Court judgment dealt with the interpretation of Section 35 ABB regarding the treatment of expenditure claimed by the assessee for a specific assessment year. The Assessing Officer (AO) contended that the expenditure should be treated as falling in the capital stream, whereas the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) maintained that it fell in the revenue stream, consistent with its previous decisions. The ITAT was also influenced by a prior decision of the Court that upheld its view. The Court observed that the question raised in this appeal mirrored the one addressed in a previous case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharti Hexacom Ltd. In that case, the Court had dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the ITAT's view through a reasoned judgment. Consequently, the Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose in the present appeal, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. In essence, the judgment clarified the application of Section 35 ABB in determining whether certain expenditures should be treated as revenue or capital. The Court's decision was guided by precedent and upheld the ITAT's interpretation, emphasizing consistency in treatment across cases. The dismissal of the appeal signified the alignment of the current case with established legal principles and previous judicial decisions.
|
