STARKEY LABORATORIES INDIA PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT CIRCLE-24(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 3205/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 December 2025AY 2016-1718 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the agreements for these expenses were executed in later financial years and not for the years cited for consistency. However, considering the larger interest of justice and a procedural issue regarding opportunity of hearing, the case was remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed provisions for marketing, advertisement, and discount expenses. The Assessing Officer disallowed these expenses, stating they were not incurred and were contingent in nature. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether provisions for marketing, advertisement, and discount expenses are allowable as business expenditure under Section 37(1) when claimed on accrual basis based on agreements. Whether the CIT(A) provided adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(1),Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 92CA(3),Section 145(1),Section 145(2)

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, DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Ram Avtar Sharma, CA, Shri Bhupesh Aggarwal and Shri Tanya Sharma, CA
For Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11.09.2025

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-12, [‘the CIT(A)’ in short] dated 21.09.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in Appeal No. CIT(A) Delhi-8/10690/2019-20 against the assessment order dated 29.12.2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a company engaged in the business of assemble, manufacture, integrate, test, sell, install, operate, maintain and repair all kind of hearing aid products and equipment. The return of income was filed on Starkey Laboratories India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 28.11.2016

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

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 →