CIT v. Liberty Group Marketing Division

ACIT, CIRCLE 22(2), NEW DELHI vs. SNAPDEAL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2017-18

…e difficult to assess the period of 10 benefit derived from such advertisement and to ascertain whether any 'brand name' was created. I may in this regard cite the decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Liberty group marketing division (315 ITR 125), the Bombay High Court in the case of Geoffrey Manner and Co, Ltd. (315--ITR 13d), the ITATMumbai decision in the— case of Kaya Ltd. (ITA no. 3175/Mum/2013), Asian Paints Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (ITA 78Q1/MUM/2010), Fine Jewellery (I) Ltd. (19 ITR 746), Warner Lambert India Ltd. (ITA 954 & 3063/Mu m/2006), Delhi ITAT decisions in Spice Communications…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GLOBUS SPIRITS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

…mer Fin. Ltd., 335 ITR 29 (Del.); I.T.A. No.2275/Del/2015 & 1522/Del/2014 5 (iii) CIT Vs. Usha Iron & Ferro Metal Corporation Ltd., 296 ITR 140 (Del) (iv) CIT Vs. Salora International Ltd., 308 ITR 199 (Del); (v) CIT Vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P & H); (vi) Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 315 ITR 150 (AT) (Del.) (VII) CIT Vs. Core Health Care Ltd., 308 ITR 263 (Guj.) 4.3 On perusal of the orders of the authorities below, we find that though during the year the assessee had capitalized a sum of Rs.1,79,77,181/- under the head tangible / know-how and brand development in the books and ha…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. GLOBUS SPIRITS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

…mer Fin. Ltd., 335 ITR 29 (Del.); I.T.A. No.2275/Del/2015 & 1522/Del/2014 5 (iii) CIT Vs. Usha Iron & Ferro Metal Corporation Ltd., 296 ITR 140 (Del) (iv) CIT Vs. Salora International Ltd., 308 ITR 199 (Del); (v) CIT Vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P & H); (vi) Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 315 ITR 150 (AT) (Del.) (VII) CIT Vs. Core Health Care Ltd., 308 ITR 263 (Guj.) 4.3 On perusal of the orders of the authorities below, we find that though during the year the assessee had capitalized a sum of Rs.1,79,77,181/- under the head tangible / know-how and brand development in the books and ha…

DCIT, CIRCLE-16(1), NEW DELHI vs. MAGIC BRICKS REALITY SERVICES LTD, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

…be difficult to assess the period of benefit derived from such advertisement and to ascertain whether any 'brand name' was created. Reliance is also placed on the decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Liberty Group Marketing Division (315 ITR 125) and the Bombay High Court in the case of Geoffrey Manner and Co. Ltd. (315 ITR 134). The judgment of Delhi High Court in CIT v. Adidas India Marketing (P.) Ltd. [2010] 195 Taxman 256 (Delhi) recognized that brand promotion exercises undertaken through media campaigns, schemes, programmes etc are essential for propagation of the brand. Similar vi…

ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JASPER INFOTECH PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

…d be difficult to assess the period of benefit derived from such advertisement and to ascertain whether any 'brand name' was created. I may in this regard cite the decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Liberty group marketing division (315 ITR 125), the Bombay High Court in the case of Geoffrey Manner and Co, Ltd. (315--ITR 13d), the ITAT- Mumbai decision in the—case of Kaya Ltd. (ITA no. 3175/Mum/2013), Asian Paints Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (ITA 78Q1/MUM/2010), Fine Jewellery (I) Ltd. (19 ITR 746), Warner Lambert India Ltd. (ITA 954 & 3063/Mu m/2006), Delhi ITAT decisions in Spice Communication…

ACIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ITA No.319,1185,1448,1822 & 2091 of 2010 vii. CIT v. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Ltd: 335 ITR 29 (Delhi) viii. CIT v. Casio India Ltd.: 335 ITR 196 (Del.) ix. CIT v. Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd.: 315 ITR 134(Bom) x. CIT v. Liberty Group Marketing Division: 315 ITR 125 (P&H) xi. CIT v. Rakhra Technologies (P)Ltd.: 243 CTR 505(P&H) xii. DCIT v. Core Healthcare Limited: 308 ITR 263 (Gujarat HC) xiii. CIT v. Brilliant Tutorials (P) Limited: 292 ITR 399 (Mad.) v. In that view of the matter, payment of Rs. 5,00,000 described as non- compete fees in the agreements, did not result in an enduring advantage, would have…

M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ITA No.319,1185,1448,1822 & 2091 of 2010 vii. CIT v. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Ltd: 335 ITR 29 (Delhi) viii. CIT v. Casio India Ltd.: 335 ITR 196 (Del.) ix. CIT v. Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd.: 315 ITR 134(Bom) x. CIT v. Liberty Group Marketing Division: 315 ITR 125 (P&H) xi. CIT v. Rakhra Technologies (P)Ltd.: 243 CTR 505(P&H) xii. DCIT v. Core Healthcare Limited: 308 ITR 263 (Gujarat HC) xiii. CIT v. Brilliant Tutorials (P) Limited: 292 ITR 399 (Mad.) v. In that view of the matter, payment of Rs. 5,00,000 described as non- compete fees in the agreements, did not result in an enduring advantage, would have…

M/S HAVELLS INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishihavells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Circle-12(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi Cr Building Ip Estate, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Havells India Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, Ltu, Nbcc Plaza, Civil Lines, New Delhi Pusp Vihar, Sector-4, Saket, Pan: Aaach0351E New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit (Ltu), Vs. Havells India Ltd, Nbcc Plaza, Pusp Vihar, Sector- 1/7 Ram Kishore Road, 4, Saket, New Delhi Civil Lines, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0351E (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ITA No.319,1185,1448,1822 & 2091 of 2010 vii. CIT v. Citi Financial Consumer Fin. Ltd: 335 ITR 29 (Delhi) viii. CIT v. Casio India Ltd.: 335 ITR 196 (Del.) ix. CIT v. Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd.: 315 ITR 134(Bom) x. CIT v. Liberty Group Marketing Division: 315 ITR 125 (P&H) xi. CIT v. Rakhra Technologies (P)Ltd.: 243 CTR 505(P&H) xii. DCIT v. Core Healthcare Limited: 308 ITR 263 (Gujarat HC) xiii. CIT v. Brilliant Tutorials (P) Limited: 292 ITR 399 (Mad.) v. In that view of the matter, payment of Rs. 5,00,000 described as non- compete fees in the agreements, did not result in an enduring advantage, would have…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GLOBUS SPIRITS LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri O. P. Kant

…(i) Empire Jute Company Vs. CIT 124 ITR 1 (SC); (ii) 335 ITR 29 (Del.); (iii) CIT Vs. Usha Iron & Ferro Metal Corporation Ltd. 296 ITR 140 (Del) (iv) CIT Vs. Salora International Ltd., 308 ITR 199 (Del); (v) CIT Vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P & H); (vi) Sony India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 315 ITR 150 (AT) (Del.) (VII) CIT Vs. Core Health Care Ltd. 308 ITR 263 (Guj.) 4.3 On perusal of the orders of the authorities below, we find that though during the year the assessee had capitalized a sum of Rs.1,79,77,181/- under the head tangible / know-how and brand development in the books and…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. RALSONS (INDIA) LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Sh.O.P.Kant

…it is accepted for a moment that there was a mixed expenditure for tin plate and glow sign boards on cycle rikshaw etc. even then it has to be allowed in terms of the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) and CIT vs Orient Ceramics & Inds. Ltd. 358 ITR 49. Without referring to any distinguishing fact or legal precedent, the judicial precedent available in assessee’s own case that it is a revenue expenditure, it was submitted has to be followed as even then the claim of the assessee has to be allowed. 6. Ld. Sr.DR was required to address…

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

ADDL. CIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES HARYANA LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES HARYANA LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD.,, SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2489/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

DCIT, SONEPAT vs. SHRI ATLAS CYCLES HARYANA LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…

ACIT, SONEPAT vs. M/S. ATLAS CYCLES (HARYANA) LTD., SONEPAT

In the result ITA Nos. 2484/Del/2011 and 4049/Del/2013 preferred by the department are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

…co- ordinate Bench of the ITAT relied upon by the Ld. CIT (A) is not on record, we do find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Liberty Group Marketing Division 315 ITR 125 (P&H) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has opined as under: “After considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and treating the expenditure incurred on glow sign boards as of revenue nature. Sec. 37(1) of the Act provides that "an…