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 allows appeal on disallowed business expenses under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>M/s Ireo Waterfront Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT, Central Circle-26 New Delhi</h3> M/s Ireo Waterfront Pvt. Ltd. Versus ACIT, Central Circle-26 New Delhi - TMI Issues:1. Disallowance of Advertisement and Business Promotion expenses2. Disallowance u/s. 14AIssue 1: Disallowance of Advertisement and Business Promotion expensesThe appellant contested the partial disallowance of Advertisement and Business Promotion expenses amounting to Rs. 13,23,600, arguing that the expenditure had been fully incurred for services rendered during the assessment year. The Assessing Officer disallowed the amount as an advance payment, stating it had not crystallized for the relevant year. The AO's decision was upheld by the ld. CIT(A), leading to the appellant's appeal. The Tribunal noted that the services had been performed, and benefits accrued to the company, making the expenditure allowable under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As the issue was tax-neutral and the technicalities unnecessary, the appeal was allowed.Issue 2: Disallowance u/s. 14AThe second appeal involved the disallowance of Advertisement and Business Promotion (ABP) expenses totaling Rs. 4.72 crores, with the AO disallowing Rs. 3.98 crores due to lack of income from projects undertaken. The ld. CIT(A) allowed Rs. 3.52 crores but sustained the disallowance of Rs. 46.45 lacs, deeming it not related to advertising. The appellant argued that the expenses were indeed for advertising purposes. Upon examination, the Tribunal found the expenses related to barricading for Vinyls, Unipol fabrications, and hoardings, confirming their advertising nature. Consequently, the disallowance made by the AO and upheld by the ld. CIT(A) was overturned, leading to both appeals being allowed.This judgment clarifies the treatment of Advertisement and Business Promotion expenses, emphasizing the necessity of actual service performance for expenditure allowance. It also highlights the importance of correctly identifying expenses related to advertising activities to prevent unjust disallowances.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
