9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the circumstances, no error has been committed by the learned Tribunal in confirming the order passed by the learned CIT(A) in deleting the addition - Decided in favour of the assessee. Treatment to software expenses - revenue expenditure or capital expenditure - Held that:- Expenditure of software stock and maintenance charges is required to be treated and / or considered as revenue expenditure. See Commissioner of Income-tax-I Versus NJ. India Invest (P.) Ltd.[2013 (7) TMI 738 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] - Decided in favour of the assessee. - TAX APPEAL NO. 1158 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 27-2-2017 - MR. M.R. SHAH AND MR. B.N. KARIA, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE FOR THE OPPONENT : MRS SWATI SOPARKAR, ADVOCAT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enue expenditure. 2.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned AO, making addition of ₹ 1,59,62,518/made on account of disallowance of claim of bad debt / trading loss and also treating the software expenses of ₹ 26 lakhs as capital expenditure, the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A). That the learned CIT(A) allowed the said appeal preferred by the assessee and directed to delete the addition of Rs, 1,59,62,518/made on account of disallowance of claim of bad debt / trading loss as well as allowed the claim of the assessee treating the software expenses of ₹ 26 lakhs as revenue expenditure. 2.3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Therefore, the said question is held against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. 5.0. Now, so far as question no. B i..e whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the CIT(A) allowing the claim of the assessee for treating software expenses of ₹ 26,00,000/as revenue expenditure is concerned, the said question is now not res integra in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax I vs. N.J.India Invest Pvt Ltd rendered Tax Appeal No. 186 of 2013. By the said decision, the similar question has been answered by the Division Bench in favour of assessee and against the revenue. We have gone through the facts in Tax Appeal N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
