DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S OXIGEN INFOVISION PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

The first ground is against the deletion of disallowance of Rs.66,32,673/- on account of advertisement expenses treating the same as revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure treated by the Assessing Officer.

Briefly stated, the facts of this ground are that the Assessing Officer treated advertisement expenses of the product named `Oxicash’ as capital in view of the fact that its benefit was going to be reaped in coming years. 3/4th of such expenditure was disallowed. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance by relying on certain orders.

We have heard the ld. DR and perused the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We are, therefore, proceeding to dispose of this appeal ex parte qua the assessee. There is no dispute on the fact that the assessee genuinely incurred expenses on advertisement during the year. Though its benefit as per the Assessing Officer was also to be derived in succeeding years, but, the fact that the advertisement, being a revenue expenditure, was incurred during the year, cannot be denied. The ld. CIT(A) has rightly taken cognizance of the order passed by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in Pepsico Holding India Pvt. Ltd., wherein expenditure on glow signs/neon signs was treated as deductible. Such view has been approved by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court.