Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 102 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of license fee paid by the assessee - Revenue treated the amount to be capital expenditure and not allowable u/s 37 - SLP has been filed by Revenue in some other case on identical facts - HELD THAT:- Agreement pursuant to which the impugned license fee has been paid was entered by the assessee in the year 2006 and assessee has been paying the license fee and in the past the payment of license fee has been accepted by Revenue as no addition by disallowing the same has been made. The addition has been made only in the year under consideration for the reason that Department has filed SLP in the case of Bharti Hexacom Ltd.[2013 (12) TMI 1115 - DELHI HIGH COURT] & Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd [2016 (11) TMI 1702 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Forest Development of Maharashtra Ltd.2017 (7) TMI 1384 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has observed that even if the principle of res judicata does not apply in tax matters yet consistency and certainty of law would require the State to take uniform position and not change their stand in the absence of change in facts and /or law. In the present case, admittedly there is no change in the facts and/or law. In such a situation, merely because on SLP has been filed by Revenue in some other case on identical facts, cannot be justification for the disallowance of expenditure. We thus find no justification in the order of AO for disallowing the expenditure. We therefore direct the deletion of addition made by AO. Thus the ground of assessee is allowed
|