9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent. ORDER P.C. : 1. This Appeal is filed by the Revenue to challenge the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Following question is presented for reconsideration : "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in treating the said payment of noncompete fees as revenue expenditure without appreciating the fact that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... low the entire expenditure as claimed by the assessee but treated it as differed revenue expenditure to be spanned over five years period. The Tribunal by the impugned judgment held in favour of the assessee relying upon and referring to the decision of this Court in the case of The Commissioner of Income-Tax-1, Mumbai V/s. M/s. Everest Advertising Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai dated 14th December, 2012 rende ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtain decisions of the High Court to which, we may make a reference later on. 5. Perusal of the materials on record would show that the Tribunal considered the expenditure in question as revenue expenditure and granted the entire benefit for the year under consideration itself. In the case of M/s. Everest Advertising Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Division Bench of this Court had granted similar benefit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the decision of the Tribunal is based on finding of facts and therefore, first question cannot be entertained. 6. The Madras High Court in the case of Asianet Communications Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai reported in 257 Taxman 473 also treated the expenditure as revenue in nature in a case where the noncompete agreement was for a period of five yers holding that the same did not r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
