9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ature without appreciating the facts that the assessee failed during the course of scrutiny proceedings to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate its claim that these were renewal expenses" 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing Indian made foreign liquor (IMFL). The assessee sells its products under various brands throughout India and exports out of India. The assessee is a Maharashtra based company and registered its brand in the state of Maharashtra but in order to have better results, the assesee is having its branch and sales depots in other parts of the country particularly in Delhi for sale of products in the national capital territory. The brand registered in Maharashtra were also to be put on record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r renewal of fees paid or to get the said brands being put on record in other states in, the country so that assessee's right in respect of said brand /levels even in those states get protected from being copied. The company in order to have better results had its branch and sales depots in Delhi where it sales its product in national capital territory and, therefore. brands registered in Maharashtra had to be put on record for which annual fees had to be pa id in other states also. The renewal fees had to be paid even for already registered brands and the expenses debited are for the above activity and not for registering any new brand. These are normal revenue expenses which are incurred year after year and also being allowed for las ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e allowed for the A.Y. 2008- 09. Firstly, we do concur with the view of the CIT(A) that the expenditure in question is revenue in nature as it does not bring into existence any new asset or benefit of enduring nature but these are recurring annual charges/renewal fee and further in view of the fact that the AO has accepted an identical expenditure in the earlier years as well as in the susbequent year, therefore, in the absence of any change in the facts and circumstances for the year under consideration, the AO is not permitted to take a different view de hors the rule of consistency. Accordingly we do not find any reason to interefere with the impugned order of CIT(A) qua this issue. The appeal of the revenue is devoid of mertis and deser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
