Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (9) TMI 493

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... se of Torrent Pharma [ 2013 (4) TMI 570 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and Cadila Healthcare Ltd. [ 2013 (3) TMI 539 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] and following which decisions in the case of the assessee also, the claim in the preceding year was allowed Since the issue admittedly stands decided in favour of the assessee in the preceding year by the first appellate authority and the Revenue having not brought to our notice any decision of higher authorities reversing the order of the Ld. CIT(A) or any other contrary decision of higher authorities in similar facts, we see no reason to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A). Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. - ITA No. 2342/AHD/2017 - - - Dated:- 26-8-2022 - SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBE .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Torrent Pharma Ltd., (2013) 29 taxmann.com 405 and Cadila Healthcare Ltd., in Tax Appeal No. 752 of 2012. 4. On perusal of the order of the AO, we have noted that the assessee had explained the nature of expenses so claimed relating to product registration as being mandatorily required as per the laws of the country to which the products were exported, vide his reply to the AO dated 5.12.2016 reproduced at para-3.2 of the order as under: 3.2. Assessee has vide its replies on this issue dated 05.12.2016 replied as under: Assessee is a trader and engaged in business of export of pharmaceutical products mainly life savings drugs. In pharmaceutical industry it is always impo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e such registration is obtained may directly export it. Manufacturer can do this as registration is in his name only. IF the manufacturer does not supply the goods as per the agreed terms we have to re-register the same products with the other manufacturer and by that view our first product registration will be null and void. Moreover, such registration is always subject to review at all times by the respective health department of the country. Thus, enduring benefits are itself in doubt and fractured in nature and become conditional. Considering the above fact and also a fact that we are not a manufacturer and also a fact that such registration is issued mainly in the name of manufacturer, the said expenditure is of revenue in nature .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ontentions, case law relied upon and observations of the A.O. in the assessment order. It is seen that the A.O. had disallowed product registration expenses of Rs. 27,57,838/- as in the opinion of the A.O. the benefit derived by the product registration expenses may benefit the appellant for many years and accordingly benefit of enduring nature had accrued to the appellant as a result of these expenses. Taking entirely of facts in view, I am not inclined to agree with the contentions of Ld. A.O. The product registration expenses are nothing but the registration expenses incurred to get the pharmaceutical products registered with the local health authorities, association and their counterparts at the foreign destinations. Without getting the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . 1,71,77,152/- made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 2 are allowed. 6. We have noted from the above that the Ld. CIT(A) noted that identical claim of the assessee in the preceding year was found by the Ld. CIT(A) to be an enabling expenses to enable exports to other countries and no new asset giving enduring benefit was created. The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the order of the jurisdictional High Court on identical issue in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (supra), and Torrent Pharma (supra), in support of his findings that the expenses were Revenue in nature. 7. Since the issue admittedly stands decided in favour of the assessee in the preceding year by the first appellate authority and the Revenue having .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates