ZUVENTUS HEALTHCARE LTD,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1433/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 May 2022AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of sales and marketing expenses as freebies to doctors, citing Supreme Court and CBDT circulars. However, the disallowance under Section 14A was deleted as the assessee did not derive any exempt income.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed sales and marketing expenses for freebies given to doctors. The lower authorities disallowed this expense. The assessee also had a disallowance under Section 14A related to exempt income.

What were the issues?

Whether expenses incurred as freebies to doctors are allowable as sales and marketing expenses. Whether disallowance under Section 14A is applicable in the absence of exempt income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(1),Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM & SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak
For Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Hearing: 21.04.2022Pronounced: 06.05.2022

आदेश / ORDER

PER S. S. GODARA, JM :

1.

This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the CIT(A) - 6, Pune’s order dated 28/04/2017 in case No. PN/CIT(A)-V/DCIT Cir- 10/716/ 2014-15 involving proceeding u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short "the Act. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

The assessee’s former substantive ground raised in the instant appeal seeks to reverse both the lower authorities action disallowing sales and marketing expenses of Rs.1,46,44,411/- incurred as alleged freebies to doctors. We note that CIT(A) detailed discussion has upheld full action to this effect in light of the Indian Medical Counsel Regulations 2002 read with CBDT circular No.5 of 2012 dated 01.08.2012 clarifying such an expenditure as not allowable u/s. 37(1) of the Act.

3.

We make it clear the assessee has not even disputed the impugned freebies offered to doctors/medical practitioners which had been claimed in the nature of sales and marketing expenditure. That being the case, we quote hon’ble apex court’s latest decision [2022] 135 taxmann.com 286 (SC) Apex Laboratory P. Ltd. Vs. DCIT settling the law in department’s favour. We thus affirm the impugned disallowance. The assessee fails in its former substantive grievance.

4.

Next comes section 14A r.w. rule 8D of the Income-Tax Rules,1962 disallowance of Rs.31,40,301/- made under both the lower proceedings. Suffice to say, the assessee has not derived any exempt income in the relevant previous year. Hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s recent decision in Principal CIT vs. Kohinoor Project (P) Ltd.,[2020] 121 taxmann.com 177(Bom) holds that the impugned disallowance does not apply in absence of any exempt income derived in the relevant previous year. We therefore adopt the very reasoning mutatis mutandis to delete the impugned disallowance.

No other ground has been pressed before us.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 6th day of May, 2022.

More judgments on Section 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →