Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (5) TMI 1003 - AT - Income TaxAddition on the issue of upward adjustment made by the AO/TPO in the arm’s length price - Held that:- Transfer pricing addition to this extent and the CIT(A) dealt with certain aspects of the determination of ALP, against which the assessee filed its separate appeal. This appeal was tagged with the assessee’s cross-appeal for the instant year in which computation of ALP in respect of three international transactions, has been challenged. We are disposing off the assessee’s appeal by a separate order. Thus, it becomes evident that the ground raised by the Revenue alleging the deletion of addition of ₹ 1.50 crore and odd does not arise out of the impugned order and is hereby dismissed as infructuous. Addition being stamp duty charges paid for leasehold premises - revenue or capital expenditure - Held that:- It is noticed that the stamp duty was paid for a property taken on lease by the assessee. It is a one-time payment and has no relation with the term of lease. The mere fact that the lease will continue for three years, would not make one time revenue expenditure, capital. As the expenditure incurred by the assessee is in respect of taking of a property on hire, in our considered opinion, no fault can be found in the opinion of the CIT(A) deleting this addition. He has rightly referred to several judgments in the impugned order in deleting the addition under similar circumstances. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT VS. Cinecita (P.) Ltd. (1982 (2) TMI 58 - BOMBAY High Court). His view is, therefore, countenanced.
|