Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 2703 2011 SLD 2703 (2011) 335 ITR 29
Delhi High Court

A.K. SIKRI AND M. L. MEHTA, JJ.

Commissioner of Income Tax v.Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Ltd.

Law:

Section:

I. Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business expenditure - Allowability of - Assessment years 2001-02 and 2002-03 - Expenditure on publicity and advertisement is to be treated as revenue in nature allowable fully in year in which it is incurred [In favour of assessee] The expenditure on publicity and advertisement is to be treated as revenue in nature allowable fully in year in which it is incurred. In the income-tax law, there is no concept of deferred revenue expenditure. Once the assessee claims the deduction for the whole amount of such an expenditure, even in the year in which it is incurred, and the expenditure fulfils the test laid down under section 37, it has to be allowed. In the assessment year 2001-02, the assessee-company claimed an expenditure of Rs. 3.93 crores on account of advertisement and publicity expenditure as revenue expenditure and the same had been debited to the profit and loss account. The Assessing Officer was of the view that this expenditure could not be termed as an expenditure relevant exclusively for the period of 12 months under consideration during the said assessment year; such advertisement and publicity expenses had a bearing on the period which spread over a period of five years and, therefore, the assessee could not claim the benefit in the year in which the expenditure was incurred. Thus, opining that the benefit was of an enduring nature, he was of the view that it was to be spread over a period of five years and, thus, allowed 1/5th of the aforesaid amount in the year in question. The Tribunal, however, allowed the assessee's claim. Held that the expenditure in question was incurred by the assessee in the relevant assessment years in which the assessee was claiming deduction thereof under section 37. Thus, there was no dispute that the expenditure was, in fact, incurred. It was also not in dispute that the expenditure in question was business expenditure incurred wholly for the purpose of the business of the assessee. The expenditure incurred in the nature of advertisement and publicity was incurred forever and in no manner any portion thereof reverted back to the assessee. There was no advantage which had…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492