Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

225 ITR 802Supreme Court of India1997#111 most cited

What is Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Expenditure that provides an enduring benefit should be amortized over its useful life, not allowed as a deduction in a single year, to prevent a distorted picture of profits. Specifically, premium paid on debentures for their issue should be amortized on a straight-line method over the life of the debentures.

568

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT · 225 ITR 802 · SC · enduring benefit · amortisation · section 37(1) · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · premium on debentures · straight line method · matching principle

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 153ASection 147Section 153CSection 132Section 14ASection 263
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

enduring benefitsection 32(1)revenue expenditureintangible assetssection 32capital expendituresection 35commercial expediencysection 30book profitsamalgamationmercantile system of accounting

Judgments citing Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. Acitcorporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1616/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. Acitcorporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1615/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. Acitcorporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1614/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. Acitcorporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1613/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. Acitcorporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1612/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. Acitcorporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1611/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai vs. Acitcorporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1610/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

ITO, Chennai vs. Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1434/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

ITO, Chennai vs. Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1433/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

ITO, Chennai vs. Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1432/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

ITO, Chennai vs. Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1431/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

ITO, Chennai vs. Perfect Stone Ltd., Chennai

In the results, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1430/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. Nos. 1610, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615 & 1616 /Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate
Section 68

…the present case, the assessee has claimed exempt income. 3.3 The Id CIT(A) ought to have noted that in the relied upon case, the Hon'ble High Court relied all the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation Limited Vs CIT (225 ITR 802) and held that by application of matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. Thus, the Hon'ble Court held that the provisions of Sec 14A r.w.r 8D cannot be made applicable in the absence of exempt income and allowed the appeal of the assessee, where…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. Sri. K.R. Kaviraj, Hospet

In the result, all the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 366/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri V.K.Gurunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nambirajan, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…td.(supra). 9. Then an issue may arise as to whether this expenditure can be allowed on a staggering basis spread over lease period as revenue expenditure in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation (225 ITR 802). Needless to mention that if the payment is capital in nature, expenditure cannot be allowed on staggered basis. Even for the purpose of spreading over period of lease, it is essential that the expenditure should be in the nature of revenue expenditure. Thus, grounds of appeal of the revenue are allowed. 10. Identical issue is raised by the rev…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. Sri. K.R. Kaviraj, Hospet

In the result, all the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 365/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri V.K.Gurunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nambirajan, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…td.(supra). 9. Then an issue may arise as to whether this expenditure can be allowed on a staggering basis spread over lease period as revenue expenditure in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation (225 ITR 802). Needless to mention that if the payment is capital in nature, expenditure cannot be allowed on staggered basis. Even for the purpose of spreading over period of lease, it is essential that the expenditure should be in the nature of revenue expenditure. Thus, grounds of appeal of the revenue are allowed. 10. Identical issue is raised by the rev…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. Sri. K.R. Kaviraj, Hospet

In the result, all the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 364/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri V.K.Gurunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nambirajan, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…td.(supra). 9. Then an issue may arise as to whether this expenditure can be allowed on a staggering basis spread over lease period as revenue expenditure in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation (225 ITR 802). Needless to mention that if the payment is capital in nature, expenditure cannot be allowed on staggered basis. Even for the purpose of spreading over period of lease, it is essential that the expenditure should be in the nature of revenue expenditure. Thus, grounds of appeal of the revenue are allowed. 10. Identical issue is raised by the rev…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. Sri. K.R. Kaviraj, Hospet

In the result, all the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 363/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Dec 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri V.K.Gurunathan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nambirajan, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…td.(supra). 9. Then an issue may arise as to whether this expenditure can be allowed on a staggering basis spread over lease period as revenue expenditure in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Corporation (225 ITR 802). Needless to mention that if the payment is capital in nature, expenditure cannot be allowed on staggered basis. Even for the purpose of spreading over period of lease, it is essential that the expenditure should be in the nature of revenue expenditure. Thus, grounds of appeal of the revenue are allowed. 10. Identical issue is raised by the rev…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Ews Finance & Investments P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2461/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Smt. Ruby George, IRS, CIT
Section 14A

…t with in the same previous year. Thus, by application of the matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. (Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd vs. CIT (225 ITR 802)). The language of s.14A (1) should be read in that context and such that it advances the scheme of the Act rather than distort it. 16. In conclusion, we are of the view that the provisions of s. 14A read with Rule 8D of the Rules cannot be made applicable in a vacuum i.e. in the absence of exempt income. The questions of law are answered in fav…

Kesari Sanjey Kundalia, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

ITA 1515/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Dec 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri. M. Karunakaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Ruby George, IRS, CIT
Section 14ASection 2Section 40

…t with in the same previous year. Thus, by application of the matching concept, in a year where there is no exempt income, there cannot be a disallowance of expenditure in relation to such assumed income. (Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd vs. CIT (225 ITR 802)). The language of s.14A (1) should be read in that context and such that it advances the scheme of the Act rather than distort it. 16. In conclusion, we are of the view that the provisions of s. 14A read with Rule 8D of the Rules cannot be made applicable in a vacuum i.e. in the absence of exempt income. The questions of law are answered in fav…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 4202/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…deferred revenue expenditure in the Act except under specified sections where amortisation is specifically provided like section 35D of the Act. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also distinguished the decision in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corporation (225 ITR 802) on the ground that in that case, it was the assessee who wanted the spread over of expenditure. It was noted and specifically stated by the Hon’ble Court that normally, revenue expenditure is to be allowed in the same year in which it is incurred and that if the assessee incurs an expenditure in a particular year, the IT Department cannot deny t…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 2720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year: 2007-08 Acit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. Circle 10(1) Udaan Bhawan, Terminal 1B, New Delhi Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. Pan No. Aaccd3570F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 226/Del/2011 (Arising Ita No.2720/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate and Shri Ankit Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

…deferred revenue expenditure in the Act except under specified sections where amortisation is specifically provided like section 35D of the Act. The Hon’ble Supreme Court also distinguished the decision in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corporation (225 ITR 802) on the ground that in that case, it was the assessee who wanted the spread over of expenditure. It was noted and specifically stated by the Hon’ble Court that normally, revenue expenditure is to be allowed in the same year in which it is incurred and that if the assessee incurs an expenditure in a particular year, the IT Department cannot deny t…