Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the commission of Rs. 18,597 paid to Prabhu Dayal Agrawal and the compensation of Rs. 70,000 paid for terminating the agreement were allowable as revenue expenditure.
Analysis: The payment of commission was found to have been made for services rendered in procuring raw materials for the assessee's business, and not for acquiring any capital asset or enduring advantage. The payment was linked to the trading operations of the company and to annual profits, with no relation to the capital value of its assets. The compensation paid for terminating the recurring commission agreement merely freed the assessee from a continuing revenue liability and did not bring into existence any new asset or advantage of enduring benefit to the business. The earlier acceptance of the nature of the payments by the revenue over a long period also supported the conclusion, there being no change in facts to justify a different view.
Conclusion: Both amounts were revenue expenditure and were deductible.
Ratio Decidendi: A payment that is incurred to meet recurring business obligations or to secure services for the conduct of the business, and which does not create or acquire an enduring capital asset or advantage, is revenue expenditure even if it is paid in a lump sum to terminate a recurring liability.