9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1642X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. The marketing and advertisement made for the purpose of exhibition of film are the functions of the producer and not the Director. The role of the director is only to direct the film and after completion, it has to be handed over to the producer. It is for the producer to make necessary advertisement, if any, to exhibit the same for public view. In view of the above, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the expenditure of ₹ 18,06,000/- is not for the business of the assessee. The business of the assessee is only direction of film and not doing marketing for exhibition of film. This Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. Disallowance to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri T.T. Durairaj Kandiar, FCA For the Respondent : Shri M. Mathivanan, JCIT ORDER PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -14, Chennai, dated 30.12.2014 and pertains to assessment year 2008-09. 2. Shri T.T. Durairaj Kandiar, the Ld. representative for the assessee, submitted that the first issue arises for consideration is addition of ₹ 12,84,362/-. According to the Ld. representative, the assessee has received an advance of ₹ 30 lakhs from one Shri V. Radhakrishnan. The said Shri V. Radhakrishnan has also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee, submitted that the assessee is a Director of cinema autography. As per the agreement, according to the Ld. representative, the assessee has to produce the film. The assessee has incurred expenditure of ₹ 18,06,000/- in advertisement. On a query from the Bench whether there is any obligation on the part of the assessee to incur the expenditure in advertisement apart from the production of film? The Ld. representative submitted that the assessee was expected to produce film. But the fact of expenditure in advertisement is not disputed. Therefore, according to the Ld. representative, it needs to be allowed. 6. We heard Shri M. Mathivanan, the Ld. D.R. also. As per the agreement between the assessee and the film producer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the film has to travel and stay for his business purpose. Therefore, there is no justification to disallow the expenditure of ₹ 24,908/-. Hence, this Tribunal is unable to uphold the orders of the authorities below. Accordingly, the orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the addition of ₹ 24,908/- is deleted. 10. Now coming to donation of ₹ 250/- and entertainment expenses of ₹ 400, the CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer on the ground that there is no agreement. When the assessee is directing the film, he has to necessarily entertain certain people, who are employed in the course of production of film, in the course of his business of direction of cinema. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
