EMPEE DISTILLERIES LTD,CHENNAI vs. ADDL. CIT/CORP RANGE, CHENNAI

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its original return of income for the assessment year 2008-09 on 29.09.2008 declaring total value of fringe benefit at ₹.36,41,391/-. After following due procedure, the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under sub-section (3) of section 115WE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] by assessing the value of fringe benefit and quantified at ₹.6,49,151/- being 20% of ₹.32,45,755/- towards sales promotion expenses. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order.

On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the amount has already been offered for taxation in the subsequent assessment year and prayed that the addition may be deleted.

On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders of authorities below.

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. The assessee has claimed ₹.50,76,303/- as sales promotion expenses whereas in the FBT return it has offered only ₹.11,05,230/-. When the assessee’s representative was asked to show cause as to why the difference should not be considered as Fringe Benefits, he has submitted before the Assessing Officer that the sales promotion expenses included expenses like travel & conveyance, guest house etc., which are shown under different heads for FBT purposes in the FBT return and the difference is due to the reallocation of expenses in the FBT return. As the assessee could not furnish any details in support of its claim, the Assessing Officer assessed the value of fringe benefit by quantifying at ₹.6,49,151/- being 20% of ₹.32,45,755/- towards sales promotion expenses and brought to tax. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the amount has already been offered for taxation in the subsequent assessment year and prayed that the addition may be deleted. Since the assessee has not produced any evidence for offering the sum for taxation in the subsequent assessment year, we direct the Assessing officer to verify the records and allow the claim of the assessee, if the said amount was offered for taxation in subsequent assessment year.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.