Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2011 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (8) TMI 1058 - HC - Income TaxExpenditure on Ad Films - Revenue or Capital Expenditure? - Contention was expenditure incurred on ad film is to be treated as capital or revenue in nature. Revenue stated that while deciding the case, tribunal ignored the ratio of the judgment in Patel International Film Ltd - HELD THAT:- The assessee has placed reliance on the case of CIT VERSUS M/S. GEOFFREY MANNERS & CO. LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS WYETH LIMITED) [2009 (2) TMI 13 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]; and on COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY CITY I VERSUS PATEL INTERNATIONAL FILM LIMITED [1974 (7) TMI 30 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. The case of Patel Engineering was also referred to and discussed in CIT v Geoffrey Manners. The undermentioned observations of the Bombay High Court in CIT v Geoffrey Manners, with which we are in complete agreement and which distinguish the case of Patel International, would be suffice to arrive at the conclusion that the appellant being engaged in the business of stock broking and share transactions, the expenditure incurred on ad films by way of advertisements for promotion and marketing of its products, being on the ongoing business, would be of revenue in nature and thus allowable as revenue expenditure - Revenue Appeal dismissed.
|