9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 910X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT(A) was correct on facts and circumstance of the case and in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,39,720/- made by the AO on capitalization of brand development expenditure? 3. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of the hearing." 3. First issue vide Ground No. 1 relates to the deletion of addition of Rs. 51,69,792/- made by the AO on capitalization of license fee and royalty expenditure. 4. As regards to this issue the ld. Counsel for the assessee at the very outset stated that it is covered vide order dated 08.09.2015 in ITA No. 3685/Del/2013 for the assessment year 2007-08 in assessee's own case by the same bench of the ITAT (copy of the said order was furnished whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n more effectively or more profitably while leaving the fixed capital untouched, the expenditure would be on revenue account, even though the advantage may endure for an indefinite future. The license fee and the royalty fee to the Government of India is on a year to year basis and this fact was never disputed by the Revenue at any point of time and thus the same has to be held as revenue in nature keeping in mind the decisions of the Supreme Court as well as the Delhi High Court." In view of the above, we do not see merit in this ground of the departmental appeal. 7. Next issue vide Ground No. 2 relates to the deletion of addition of Rs. 1,39,720/- made by the AO on capitalization of brand development expenditure. 8. As regards to this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d advertisement is to be treated as Revenue in nature allowable fully in the year in which it was incurred. The assessee's case is squarely covered by these judgments as well as the judgment of Gujrat High Court in case of DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v. CORE HEALTHCARE LTD. [2009] 308 ITR 263 (Guj) which held as under: "14. In relation to the first item, namely, advertisement expenses, it is not in dispute that the expenditure of Rs. 70 lakhs and odd was incurred on a special advertisement campaign. However, that by itself would not be sufficient to determine as to whether the expenditure in question is on revenue account or capital account. The approach of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the expenditure in question was treated as d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Co. Ltd. [1989] 177 ITR 377 (SC) specifically lay down that the nature of advantage has to be considered in a commercial sense and the test of enduring benefit is not a certain or conclusive test and cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without regard to the particular facts and circumstances of a given case. The expression "asset or advantage of an enduring nature" has been evolved to emphasise the element of a sufficient degree of durability appropriate to the context. The idea of once for all payment and enduring benefit are not to be treated as something akin to statutory conditions. 16. Applying the aforesaid settled legal position to the facts of the case, it is not possible to agree with the appellant-Revenue that the adverti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
