Export obligation removed by notification, customs duty demand invalidated; penalties under s.112 and s.114AA quashed due to inadmissible s.108 statem...
Customs officers must wear and use department-issued body-worn cameras when clearing passenger baggage, with daily secure transfer and 30-day retentio...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10041 to 10060 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that the customer acquisition costs incurred routinely are revenue in nature and deductible in the year of accrual, not capitalized, because they are recurring and not of enduring benefit. Porting charges and data-entry charges wereheld revenue expenditure. The subsidy/compensation on handsets, being split between amounts recovered from customers (accepted as revenue receipts) and amounts subsidized by the assessee, could not be characterized as capital expenditure; the Assessing Officer's contradictory treatment undermined Revenue's position. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the contested expenditures as deductible revenue losses for assessment purposes rather than capitalized/depreciable assets.
ITAT held that the customer acquisition costs incurred routinely are revenue in nature and deductible in the year of accrual, not capitalized, because they are recurring and not of enduring benefit. Porting charges and data-entry charges wereheld revenue expenditure. The subsidy/compensation on handsets, being split between amounts recovered from customers (accepted as revenue receipts) and amounts subsidized by the assessee, could not be characterized as capital expenditure; the Assessing Officer's contradictory treatment undermined Revenue's position. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the contested expenditures as deductible revenue losses for assessment purposes rather than capitalized/depreciable assets.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.