PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL -1 KOL vs. MR. SUBRATA BANIK

PDF · subscribers
ITAT/354/2017HC CalcuttaWBCHCO003854201723 November 2021Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the appeal on the ground of low tax effect, as it was below the monetary limit fixed by the CBDT. The substantial questions of law were left open.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that deleted the disallowance of advertisement expenses claimed as deferred revenue expenditure. The appeal was filed for multiple assessment years.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT erred in deleting the disallowance of advertisement expenses as deferred revenue expenditure and if expenses from a previous year not related to the current assessment year can be allowed as deferred revenue expenditure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

OD-66 ITAT/354/2017 IA NO: GA/2/2017(Old No.GA/3559/2017) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX) ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-I, KOLKATA VERSUS MR. SUBRATA BANIK BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 23rd November, 2021 Appearance :-

Ms. Sucharita Biswas, Adv. Mr. Asok Bhowmick, Adv. … For Appellant Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Avra Majumder, Adv. … For Respondent

The Court : This appeal by the assessee filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 18th November, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.(S.S.)A. Nos. 83, 84, 85 & 89/KOL/2013 for assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06. The appellant has raised the following questions of law for consideration :- a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata

2 erred in law in deleting the disallowance of claim of advertisement expenses as deferred revenue expenditure ? b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata justified in law that the expenses incurred in previous year not related to assessment year in question can be allowed as deferred revenue expenditure ? We have heard Ms. Sucharita Biswas, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant revenue and Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent assessee. Learned Standing Counsel for the appellant submitted that the present appeal is below the monetary limit fixed by the CBDT in their Circular and therefore the revenue cannot pursue the appeal. The said submission is placed on record and the appeal stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect. Consequently, substantial questions of law are left open. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) SN/S. Das AR(CR)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →