9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 616X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR Respondent by : None ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order dated 28/10/2016 passed by CIT (A)-10, New Delhi for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 51,41,899/- made by the AO on account of project expenses ignoring the fact that the same has not been Incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business and was rather in the nature of donation, thus passing an order overlooking the finding of facts by the AO as contained in the assessment order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtilizers over several years, and therefore, these expenses cannot be treated as revenue expenditure and rather are capital in nature. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in overlooking the admitted fact that the assessee is engaged in socio economic activity and thus the expense incurred on such project expenses cannot be treated as business expenses in view of Explanation-2 to Section37(l), which reads as under: - For removal of doubts it is hereby declared that for the purpose of subsection (1) any expenditure incurred by an assessee in the activities relating to corporate social responsibility referred in section 135 of the companies Act, 2013(18 of 2013) of shall not be deemed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer as well as before the CIT(A). 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order. The Ld. DR also submitted the order of the Tribunal dated 8/8/2019 and 6/9/2017 (ITA No. 573/Del/2016 Assessment Year 2011-12 and ITA No. 6831/Del/2014 Assessment Year 2010-11) and submitted that the issue has been decided against the Revenue by the Tribunal. 7. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The CIT(A) has followed the earlier year orders in assessee s case for Assessment Years 2008-09, 2010-11 2011-12 and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. The issue contested herein regarding the addition on account of project expenses was decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal in Assessment Year 2010-11 2011-12 (I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sale and marketing of fertilizers. The respondent-assessee was therefore required to incur the said expenditure, in order to run, operate and continue its business. 14. We perceive that there is a degree of contradiction in the plea raised by the Revenue, when they claim that the respondent-assessee was not engaged in 'business' or the expenditure incurred was not on Account of business expediency. Income earned by the respondent-assessee has been treated and taxed under the head profits and gains of business and profession. In the given facts, it would be incongruous for the Revenue to urge that the purpose and goal behind the activities undertaken by the respondent- assessee was not commercial but charity as the intent and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
