Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Pr. CIT, Central-3 Versus M/s Seagram Distilleries Pvt. Ltd.

2016 (5) TMI 33 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Provision for breakage in transit - whether amounts to provisioning for contingent liability? - Held that:- It is not in dispute that it stands covered in favour of the Revenue by the decision of this Court in Seagram Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat extent is set aside.

Expenditure incurred on brand creation - Held that:- Spread of the brand expenses over a period of five years was actually in the nature of deferred revenue expenditure and the question of treating it as capital ex .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Aziz, Adv For the Respondent : Mr Deepak Chopra and Mr Amit Shrivastava, Adv ORDER CM No.11991/2016 in ITA 224/2016 CM No.11993/2016 in ITA 225/2016 1. For the reasons stated in the applications, the delay in filing the appeals is condoned. 2. The ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Assessment Years ( AYs ) 2006-07 and 2008-09. 4. The two broad issues urged by the Revenue are: (i) Whether the ITAT erred in accepting the case of the Assessee that making a provision for breakage in transit amounts to provisioning for continge .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

5. As far as the first issue is concerned it is not in dispute that it stands covered in favour of the Revenue by the decision of this Court dated 6th October, 2015 in Seagram Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 581 (Del). Consequently, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on is concerned, it is seen from the impugned order of the ITAT that the Assessee was in appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) restricting the brand expenses to only 1/5th for the relevant AYs. The Assessing Officer ( A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version