9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (8) TMI 1365 - AT - Income TaxNature of expenses - Disallowance of Product Development expenses written off - due to technological obsolescence the said project is not likely to result in any economic benefits to the assessee and the capital work-in-progress of this project was written off and ultimately the project was abandoned - HELD THAT - AO presumed that the Software Development Project was completed whereas the software project ProHR was not completed and not even put for initial trial with any customers then only the product can be sellable in the open market. Since the software project Pro HR was abandoned there was no enduring benefit to the assessee as there is no existence of a new software. Therefore the expenses are to be allowed as Revenue in nature and the addition made by the lower authorities are liable to be deleted. Appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of Project Development Expenses Written Off. 2. Applicability of Judicial Precedents. 3. Deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Disallowance of Project Development Expenses Written Off: The primary issue is the disallowance of Rs. 19,27,806/- claimed by the assessee as Project Development Expenses written off. The assessee, a company engaged in Software Development and Maintenance, incurred this expenditure for developing a software product named "ProHR." The project started in 2009-10 but was abandoned due to technological obsolescence, with no economic benefits expected. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, treating the expenses as capital in nature, and added it to the income of the assessee. 2. Applicability of Judicial Precedents: The assessee argued that the expenditure should be treated as revenue in nature, citing various judicial precedents. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating that the software was of enduring nature and could not be converted to revenue expenditure after three years. The assessee contended that the judicial precedents relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) were not applicable to the facts of the case. The Tribunal referred to the judgments in DCIT-Vs-Magnetic Meter Systems India Ltd. and ACIT-Vs-Essar Steel Ltd., where it was held that expenditure on infructuous capital projects is revenue in nature. The Tribunal also cited the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT-Vs-Trigent Software Ltd. and CIT-Vs-Idea Cellular Ltd., which supported the assessee's claim that such expenses should be treated as revenue expenditure if no new asset came into existence. 3. Deduction under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961: The assessee argued that the expenditure should be deductible under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it was incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The Tribunal noted that the software project "ProHR" was not completed and was abandoned due to technological advancements. The Tribunal emphasized that the expenditure did not result in an enduring benefit or the creation of a new asset, thus qualifying as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal applied the principles from the judgments in Empire Jute Co. Ltd. and British Insulated & Helsby Cables Ltd., concluding that the expenses were part of the profit-earning process and not for acquiring an asset of permanent character. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the expenses incurred on the abandoned software project "ProHR" should be treated as revenue in nature. The addition made by the lower authorities was deleted, and the disallowance of Rs. 19,27,806/- was not sustained. The appeal filed by the Assessee was allowed, and the order was pronounced on 22-08-2024.
|
