TMI Blog2010 (12) TMI 532X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r attending the different income-tax matters and also in respect of remuneration for statutory and tax audit. In our opinion, the same cannot be disallowed and Ld. CIT is not correct to say that the said expenditure has to be disallowed. So far as the sum of ₹ 34,605/- is concerned, it is seen that the said pertains to the appeal filing fees before the CIT, filing different forms before ROC, fees for filing appeals before the ITAT and hence, same is also allowable expenditure. expenditure shown on register and share transfer charges, - the details filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT, it is seen that these are expenses having no direct nexus with the issue of the share capital but are incurred for the statutory compliance of the S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee to establish the claim Regarding brokerage charges for premises - the assessee has deducted the TDS and the acknowledgement of the TDS return filed it the A.Y. 2006-07 are placed before the A.O - The Ld. Counsel referred to page 12 of the compilation where copy of the reply filed to Ld. CIT in the 263 proceedings is placed - He, therefore, pleaded that no disallowance u/s.40A(ia) can be made - Appeal is partly allowed - ITA No. 6189/Mum/2009 - - - Dated:- 31-12-2010 - R.S. Padvekar, R.K. Panda, JJ. R.C. Jain for the Appellant K.R. Das for the Respondent ORDER R.S. Padvekar: In this appeal the assessee has challenged the impugned order of the Ld. CIT-9, Mumbai passed u/s. 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication, filing of appeals, fees for statutory audit and tax audit etc. (iii) The legal and professional charges which also includes expenses on the registration and share transfer charges of Rs.3,26,791/-. It is further noted by the CIT that the assessee has been allowed Rs.65,000/- as a listing fees under the administrative and office expenses and of this expenditure as capital in nature and hence, the A.O. should have disallowed the same. (iv) Legal and professional charges, finance consultancy charges, which include sum of Rs.6,30,442/- paid towards the brokerage paid for the premises of Rawal Apartments, Commission of Finance and service for arranging inter-corporate deposit etc. So far as brokerage is concerned, the Ld. CIT is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the consultancy for preferential issue of the shares, other expenditure is not directly related to the issue of the shares. It is argued that Rs.16,530/- are paid to M/s. Choudhary and Singhvi towards consultancy for preferential warrants. It is argued that warrants only provides options to the warrant holders to purchase of the shares of the company and hence, as such, warrants do not result in increase in the warrant shares. He, therefore, pleaded, at most to the extent of Rs.70,000/- the disallowance can be made. 7. In respect of the legal and professional charges, it is argued that the professional fees is paid to the C.A. firm for attending the income-tax scrutiny and other related matters and as well as remuneration for statutor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the A.O. The Ld. Counsel referred to page 12 of the compilation where copy of the reply filed to Ld. CIT in the 263 proceedings is placed. He, therefore, pleaded that no disallowance u/s.40A(ia) can be made. 10. The next issue in respect of the custom duty redemption find and custom find. He submitted that the said expenditure is allowable and cannot be disallowed. So far as prior period expenses are concerned, it is argued that the said law is crystallised in the year under reference. He, therefore, pleaded that the assessment order is not erroneous may be prejudicial to the interests of the revenue to some extent and hence no powers can be exercised u/s.263 of the Act. Per contra, the Ld. D.R. supported the order of the Ld. CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re shown on register and share transfer charges, from the details filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT, it is seen that these are expenses having no direct nexus with the issue of the share capital but are incurred for the statutory compliance of the SEBI Guidelines, stock listing etc and Ld. CIT is not correct to say that the said expenditure is prima facie capital in nature. So far as the issue of brokerage is concerned, it is seen that as noted by the Ld. CIT himself, the brokerage is paid for acquiring the premises for 11 months. Nowhere, it is a case of Ld. CIT that it is for purchasing the premises. In our opinion, the said expenditure is allowable one and does not partake the character of capital expenditure. The Ld. CIT has also not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
