2006 (7) TMI 103 - HC - Income Tax

Quantification of discount - Business expenditure Assessee provide some amount as discount to the dealers for breakage and leakage but revenue disallowed the discount held that only assessee can determine the loss AO can not assume the role of assesee and quantify the discount

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of business expenditure claimed as discount, breakage, leakage, and burst of bottles.

Analysis:
The case involved an appeal by the Revenue against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal concerning the assessment year 1998-99. The assessee, engaged in the manufacturing and sale of soft drinks, claimed an amount under breakage, leakage, and burst of bottles. The Assessing Officer disallowed the entire amount, adding it to the assessee's income. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) considered the material on record and acknowledged the transactions but disagreed with the quantum claimed by the assessee. The Commissioner held that the net discount given by the assessee should be in line with the previous year's percentage. The Tribunal, citing a precedent, emphasized that if there is a nexus between the expenditure and the business purpose, the Revenue cannot substitute its opinion for that of the assessee.

The High Court, in its judgment, noted that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) could not assume the role of the assessee in determining the appropriate expenditure towards discount. Relying on the precedent set by the Division Bench in a similar case, the Court emphasized that the Revenue cannot act as the businessman and decide on the expenditure. The Court found that the Tribunal rightly set aside the Commissioner's order and granted full relief to the assessee. The Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose for consideration and dismissed the appeal.