9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Dispute over deletion of addition of advertisement expenses by the ITO. Analysis: The judgment involves a dispute regarding the deletion of an addition of Rs. 53,391 made by the ITO in the assessment year 1977-78. The assessee, a renowned soft drink manufacturer, had claimed the amount as advertisement expenses. The Commissioner (Appeals) initially deleted the addition, stating that the company had introduced a new product, necessitating sampling and advertisement. However, upon appeal by the revenue, the Tribunal sent the matter back for reevaluation. The Commissioner (Appeals) then allowed the claim based on past history and the nature of expenses, leading to the revenue disputing this decision before the Tribunal. The revenue contended that during the relevant period, the sale mostly involved the old product Coca Cola, questioning the necessity of popularizing the drink through free sampling. The assessee's counsel argued that free samples were a normal practice approved by the management. However, the counsel failed to provide specific details or justification for certain instances of free sampling, especially at private events like weddings and birthdays. The Tribunal emphasized that each assessment year must be independently evaluated, even if past claims were accepted without scrutiny. It noted discrepancies in the nature and purpose of the claimed expenses, particularly in instances of free sampling at private events. The Tribunal scrutinized a detailed list of expenses presented by the assessee, highlighting various instances of free sampling given to individuals at private functions. It found such actions to be more of personal gestures towards friends and relatives rather than legitimate advertisement expenses. The Tribunal concluded that the nature and context of the expenses did not align with genuine advertisement activities. Therefore, it partially allowed the revenue's appeal, upholding the deletion of only a portion of the claimed expenses while disallowing the majority related to personal gestures. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on the distinction between legitimate advertisement expenses and personal gestures disguised as such. It emphasized the need for expenses to align with the business purpose and raised concerns over the nature of free sampling at private events. The judgment highlights the importance of justifying claimed expenses in each assessment year based on their merit and relevance to the business activities.
|
