<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Appellate Tribunal Confirms Brand Ambassador, Advertising, and Service Center Expenses as Deductible u/s 37.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78435</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal addressed several issues: 1. Disallowance of Brand Ambassador Expenses - AO disallowed 75% as capital expenditure, but CIT(A) found it to be revenue in nature u/s 37. 2. Disallowance of Advertisement and Sales Promotion expenses - Tribunal disagreed with AO, stating expenses were for sales enhancement and profit, qualifying for deduction u/s 37. 3. Disallowance of Service Centre expenses - Tribunal upheld provision for warranty as industry practice, citing precedent for deduction u/s 37. Revenue&#039;s grounds were rejected in all three instances.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:10:02 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:10:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=756218" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appellate Tribunal Confirms Brand Ambassador, Advertising, and Service Center Expenses as Deductible u/s 37.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78435</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal addressed several issues: 1. Disallowance of Brand Ambassador Expenses - AO disallowed 75% as capital expenditure, but CIT(A) found it to be revenue in nature u/s 37. 2. Disallowance of Advertisement and Sales Promotion expenses - Tribunal disagreed with AO, stating expenses were for sales enhancement and profit, qualifying for deduction u/s 37. 3. Disallowance of Service Centre expenses - Tribunal upheld provision for warranty as industry practice, citing precedent for deduction u/s 37. Revenue&#039;s grounds were rejected in all three instances.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:10:02 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78435</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>