9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rely covered by the decision of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court [ 2012 (7) TMI 696 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] wherein it has been held that the above expenditure on account of employee stock option scheme is an ascertained liability for deduction and further also held that the expenses debited is cost of employee stock option plan in the profit and loss account is an allowable expenditure. The Ld. departmental representative also could not point out any other judicial precedent against the above judicial precedents cited by the Ld. authorized representative. - Decided in favour of assessee. - SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Assessee : Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv Shri Gaurav Jai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al amount was, thus, in the nature of employee benefit allowable under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act‟). 1.3 Without prejudice, the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in not allowing deduction of the aforesaid amount of loan written off as loss incidental to business under section 28 of the Act. 2. That the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in enhancing the income of the appellant (without issuing notice under section 251 of the Act) by directing further disallowance on account of difference between the sale price of SAR and the exercise price of SAR (prefixed at ₹ 140 per SAR) paid to the employees of the appellant, holding the same to be capital expe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted the copy of the scheme as well as the details of the expenditure claimed by the assessee. 6. The Ld. assessing officer held that it is a capital loss being the difference between the purchase price of an asset and the price that the investor ultimately sales, the same assets 4. And therefore he disallowed a sum of ₹ 2 096 3780/ under the head‟s are expenses treated as a loss. 7. Assessee aggrieved with the order of the Ld. assessing officer passed under section 143(3) of the income tax act on 28/03/2013 under section 143 (3) for assessment year 2009 -2010 determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 1 034966460/ against the returned income of ₹ 1 002192108/ , preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). 8. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erein relying upon the decision of the special bench in 144 ITD 21 claim of the assessee with respect to the above disallowance were allowed vide para No. 7 of that order. The coordinate bench in para No. 8 also held that the issue is also squarely covered by the decision of the Hon‟ble Madras High Court in 211 Taxman 554 wherein it has been held that the above expenditure on account of employee stock option scheme is an ascertained liability for deduction and further the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT versus Lemon tree hotels Ltd in ITA No. 107/2015 has also held that the expenses debited is cost of employee stock option plan in the profit and loss account is an allowable expenditure. The Ld. departmental representative also c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
