TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal directs re-examination of deduction claims and fringe benefits valuation.</h1> <h3>Whirlpool of India Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax</h3> Whirlpool of India Ltd. Versus Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax - TMI Issues Involved:1. Validity of the CIT(A)'s order.2. Inclusion of sales promotion expenses in Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT).3. Applicability of the Supreme Court's judgment in Goetze India Limited.4. Powers of the CIT(A) and ITAT regarding claims not made through revised returns.5. Classification of expenditure on gift items for FBT purposes.Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of the CIT(A)'s Order:The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s order as vague, based on incorrect appreciation of facts, bad in law, and void ab initio. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) confirmed the FBT assessment on the ground that the appellant had not made a claim by revising the return, thus supporting the Assessing Officer's decision.2. Inclusion of Sales Promotion Expenses in FBT:The assessee argued that the net expenditure on gift items incurred for sales promotion should not be regarded as a fringe benefit. The Tribunal considered the nature of the gift items, which were given to customers as part of sales promotion schemes and not as a benefit to employees. The Tribunal referred to the Delhi High Court's judgment in T&T Motors Ltd. vs ACIT, which clarified that such promotional expenses do not fall under FBT.3. Applicability of the Supreme Court's Judgment in Goetze India Limited:The CIT(A) relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Goetze India Limited, which stated that the Assessing Officer cannot entertain a claim for deduction otherwise than by a revised return. The Tribunal acknowledged this but emphasized that the Supreme Court's decision does not impinge upon the powers of the ITAT under section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.4. Powers of the CIT(A) and ITAT Regarding Claims Not Made Through Revised Returns:The Tribunal highlighted that while the Assessing Officer is not empowered to entertain claims for deductions not made through revised returns, the appellate authorities, including the CIT(A) and ITAT, have the power to adjudicate such claims on merits. The Tribunal reiterated that the CIT(A) has coterminous powers with the Assessing Officer and should have considered the merits of the assessee's claim.5. Classification of Expenditure on Gift Items for FBT Purposes:The Tribunal examined whether the expenditure on gift items provided to customers under sales promotion schemes should be included in the value of fringe benefits. Referring to the Delhi High Court's judgment in T&T Motors Ltd. vs ACIT and CBDT Circular No. 8 of 2005, the Tribunal concluded that such expenses are akin to providing discounts or rebates and should not be classified as gifts for FBT purposes. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine and verify the claim for deduction, emphasizing that the claim should not be denied merely on technical grounds in the absence of a revised return.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to re-examine the claim for deduction of sales promotion expenses and determine the value of fringe benefits afresh. The Tribunal's findings in ITA No. 2006/Del/2011 for AY 2007-08 were applied mutatis mutandis to ITA No. 4652 & 4653/D/2012 for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10, respectively. The order was pronounced in the open court on 17.4.2014.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
