CIT v. Patel International Film Ltd.

DCIT RG 8(2), Mumbai vs. Proctor & Gamble Hygiene & Health Care Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.3518 & 2277/Mum/2012 Procter & Gamble Hygiene Vs. Additional Cit Circle 8(2) & Healthcare Limited Mumbai -400020 P & G Plaza Cardinal Gracias Road, Chakkala, Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400009 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacp6332M Appellant .. Respondent

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Procter & Gamble Hygine & Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 8(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.3518 & 2277/Mum/2012 Procter & Gamble Hygiene Vs. Additional Cit Circle 8(2) & Healthcare Limited Mumbai -400020 P & G Plaza Cardinal Gracias Road, Chakkala, Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400009 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacp6332M Appellant .. Respondent

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Addl CIT RG 8(2), Mumbai vs. Proctor & Gamble Hyginene & Health Care Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.3518 & 2277/Mum/2012 Procter & Gamble Hygiene Vs. Additional Cit Circle 8(2) & Healthcare Limited Mumbai -400020 P & G Plaza Cardinal Gracias Road, Chakkala, Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400009 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacp6332M Appellant .. Respondent

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Procter & Gamble Hygiene & Health Care Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 8(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.3518 & 2277/Mum/2012 Procter & Gamble Hygiene Vs. Additional Cit Circle 8(2) & Healthcare Limited Mumbai -400020 P & G Plaza Cardinal Gracias Road, Chakkala, Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400009 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacp6332M Appellant .. Respondent

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Procter & Gamble Hygiene & Health Care Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.C.I.T. Cir. 8(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.3518 & 2277/Mum/2012 Procter & Gamble Hygiene Vs. Additional Cit Circle 8(2) & Healthcare Limited Mumbai -400020 P & G Plaza Cardinal Gracias Road, Chakkala, Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400009 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacp6332M Appellant .. Respondent

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Addl CIT RG 8(2), Mumbai vs. Proctor & Gamble Hygiene & Health Care Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhita No.3518 & 2277/Mum/2012 Procter & Gamble Hygiene Vs. Additional Cit Circle 8(2) & Healthcare Limited Mumbai -400020 P & G Plaza Cardinal Gracias Road, Chakkala, Andheri (East) Mumbai – 400009 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacp6332M Appellant .. Respondent

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Procter & Gamgle Hygiene& Healthcare, Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

Appeals are partly allowed

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Addl CIT RG 7(1), Mumbai vs. Proctor & Gamble Hygiene & Healthcare Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are partly allowed

…1. It was the assessee contention that the expenditure was incurred for advertisement of products being manufactured/marketed by it in the ongoing business and no there is enduring benefit. The AO relied on the decision of CIT vs. Patel International Film Ltd 102 ITR 219 which was confirmed by the CIT(A). This issue is covered in favour of the assessed by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Geoffrey Manner & Co. Ltd. 180 Taxman 87 where in the above decision was distinguished and held that expenditure was revenue in nature if the same was incurred in the ongoing business. Res…

Nivea India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3)(1), Mumbai

…y the Act of producing the film the assessee had acquired a benefit of enduring nature,that the film produced was a capital asset, that same was subsequently exploited for the purpose of advertisement. He relied upon the case of Patel International Film Ltd. (102 ITR 219). 6.1.Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed objections before the DRP.However,the objections were rejected by the DRP and the order of the AO was confirmed. 6.2.Before us,the AR stated that reliance by the AO on Patel International (supra)was misplaced, that the facts of that case were totally different,that the assessee was a ma…

Future Capital Holdings Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain M/S. Capital First Ltd. Add. Cit, Range – 8(1) (Formerly Future Capital Holdings Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan India Bulls Finance Centre M.K. Road Vs. Tower 2, 15Th Floor, Senapati Mumbai 400020 Bapat Marg, Elphinston (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan – Aacck6863C Appellant Respondent Add. Cit, Range – 8(1) M/S. Capital First Ltd. (Formerly Future Capital Holdings Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan India Bulls Finance Centre M.K. Road Vs. Tower 2, 15Th Floor, Senapati Mumbai 400020 Bapat Marg, Elphinston (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan – Aacck6863C Appellant Respondent

…nature. It is submitted that the learned CIT(A) correctly followed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 134 (Bom) wherein the decision in the case of Patel International Films Ltd. (102 ITR 219) relied on by the AO has been distinguished by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. 5.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record including the judicial pronouncements cited. The facts of the matter as emanate from the record are that in the course of assessment proceedings the AO observed that th…

Addl CIT RG 8(1), Mumbai vs. Future Capital Holdings Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain M/S. Capital First Ltd. Add. Cit, Range – 8(1) (Formerly Future Capital Holdings Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan India Bulls Finance Centre M.K. Road Vs. Tower 2, 15Th Floor, Senapati Mumbai 400020 Bapat Marg, Elphinston (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan – Aacck6863C Appellant Respondent Add. Cit, Range – 8(1) M/S. Capital First Ltd. (Formerly Future Capital Holdings Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan India Bulls Finance Centre M.K. Road Vs. Tower 2, 15Th Floor, Senapati Mumbai 400020 Bapat Marg, Elphinston (W) Mumbai 400013 Pan – Aacck6863C Appellant Respondent

…nature. It is submitted that the learned CIT(A) correctly followed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Geoffrey Manners and Co. Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 134 (Bom) wherein the decision in the case of Patel International Films Ltd. (102 ITR 219) relied on by the AO has been distinguished by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. 5.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record including the judicial pronouncements cited. The facts of the matter as emanate from the record are that in the course of assessment proceedings the AO observed that th…