DCIT v. Metro Shoes Pvt. Ltd.

ACIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Wyeth Lederle Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as CO of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4070/Mum/2005 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2000-01) Acit-7(3) बिधम/ M/S. Wyeth Ltd. Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Level 6 & 7, Plating Plot Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. No. C-59, G- Block Bkc, Road, Mumbai-400020. Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400098. Cross Objection No. 376/Mum/2005 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.4070/Mum/2005 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2000-01) M/S. Wyeth Ltd. बिधम/ Acit-7(3) Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Level 6 & 7, Plating Plot Vs. No. C-59, G- Block Bkc, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Bandra (E), Mumbai- Road, Mumbai-400020. 400098. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc1451A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Rajnandani Shukla Revenue By: Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 08/02/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/02/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue & The Cross Objection (Co) Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Mumbai Dated 22.03.2005 For The Ay. 2000-01. 2. The Ground No. 1 Of The Revenue & Only Ground Raised By The Assessee In The Co Are Dealt Together. The Ground Is Against The Action Of Ld. Cit(A) Directing The Ao To Delete The Addition Of Rs.21,54,713/- (20% Of The Expenditure Of Rs.1,07,73,564/-).

…A.Y. 2000-01 M/s. Wyeth Lederle Ltd. year after year, although the advertisement boost the future prospects of the business. In view thereof, such expenses are in the nature of revenue expenditure and relied on the decision of DCIT Vs. Metro Shoes Pvt. Ltd. (268 ITR 106) (AT) and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the Ld. CIT(A), the revenue is before us. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It has been brought to our notice that similar issue arose in assessee’s own case for earlier assessment year i.e. 1991-92, 1996-97 and subsequent assessme…

ACIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Wyeth Lederle Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue and CO filed by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleacit – 7(3) Vs. M/S Wyeth Ltd Room No. 615, 6Th Floor (Formerly Known As Aayakar Bhavan, Wyeth Lederle Ltd) Mk Road, Worli Level 6& 7 Plating Mumbai – 400 020. Plot No. C-59, G Block Bkc, Bandra (E) Mumbai - 400098 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc1451A Appellant .. Respondent Dcit – 7(3) Vs. M/S Wyeth Ltd Room No. 615, 6Th Floor (Formerly Known As Aayakar Bhavan, Wyeth Lederle Ltd) Mk Road, Worli Level 6& 7 Plating Mumbai – 400 020. Plot No. C-59, G Block Bkc, Bandra (E) Mumbai - 400098 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc1451A Appellant .. Respondent

…enditure of Rs. 5,05,66,589/- incurred on advertisement as capital expenditure. 9. From the records find that this ground has since, assessment year 2000-01, been allowed in favour of the appellant by relying on the decision in the case of DCIT v. Metro Shoes 268 ITR 106 and the decision of Honorable ITAT Mumbai Bench F, Mumbai in the case of M/s Geoffrey Manners and Co. Mumbai. Similarly, following the ratio of these decisions and the reasons of my Id. predecessors, disallowance for the year under appeal is also deleted. This ground of appeal is thus decided in favour of the appellant. 11. On the second dispute…

ACIT - 7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Wyeth Ltd., Mumbai

…under :- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in directing the A.O. to delete the addition of Rs. 3l,9l,493/- on advertisement expense as revenue expenditure relying on Ac occasion of the Metro Shoes Pvt. Ltd., 268 ITR 106 (AT) which the Department has not accepted. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in directing the A.O. to exclude Excise Duty and Sales Tax from the total turnover while computing the deduction u/s. 80HHC relying on the decision of CIT Vs. Sudarshan Chemical India Ltd. (245 ITR 769), which the Depa…