9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1036X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibhav Global Ltd [ 2021 (12) TMI 1407 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] had also held under similar circumstances, the expenses incurred thereon to be revenue expenditure u/s 37 - Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member And Shri Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA, Ms. Shivangi Kumar, Adv For the Revenue : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR ORDER PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No. 6265/Del/2019 for AY 2016-17, arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ld. CIT(A) , in short] in Appeal No. 10224/18- 19 dated 11.06.2019 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fessional towards due diligence fees for rending assistance for acquisition of Samudra Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd. This sum was claimed as revenue expenditure by the assessee u/s 37 of the Act. The ld AO observed that since this expenditure has been incurred for acquisition of another company, the same would be capital in nature and accordingly disallowed the same in the same assessment. This action of the ld AO was upheld by the ld CIT(A). 4. We find that this issue is no longer res integra in view of the decision of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Onmobile Global Ltd reported in 129 taxmann.com 254 wherein, it was held that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for conducting due diligence of a company which was eve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be revenue expenditure u/s 37 of the Act. The ld DR placed on record that a decision of admission of Special Leave Petition of the revenue by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Vaibhav Global reported in 143 taxmann.com 211, which is against the decision Hon ble Rajasthan High Court referred supra. But as on date, we find that the decision of the Hon ble Rajasthan High Court has not been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and hence, that would apply as a binding precedent for the Tribunal. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon ble Karnataka and Rajasthan High Court referred (supra), we direct the ld AO to grant deduction on account of due diligence fees paid to the professional in the sum of Rs. 1,00,89, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
