2014 (3) TMI 685

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ces of the appellant's case, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs.4,37,63,203/- even though they have not been incurred for the employees of the appellant company. 2. In law and in the facts and in circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that fringe benefit tax is not liable to be paid by the appellant in respect of the following items of expenditure as they have been incurred only with relation to non-employees and are being purely for the business purposes of the appellant. Sr. Particulars FBT (Non-Employees) No. Expenditure 1 Conference 1,22,76,602 2 Sales promotion including publicity 15,33,70,687 3 Conveyance 10,56,66,815 4 Hotel, Boarding and Lodging 8,16....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd are being purely for the business purposes of the appellant. 3. The ld.CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts and in circumstances of the case by incorrectly applying the provisions of section 115WB(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thereby levying FBT on expenditure which had no direct/indirect connection to the employees of the appellant company which is precondition as per the provisions of the Act and also the legislative intent as explained by the budget speech in the explanatory notes. 4. The ld.CIT(A) erred while acting as the first appellate authority under the Income-tax Act, 1961 was certainly not bound by that Circular and, accordingly, he ought to have rendered his own decision on all the issues raised by the appellant in it....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....said CBDT Circular." 5. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the only issue in this ground of the appeal of the assessee for all three years is regarding addition made on account of Fringe Benefit Tax ("FBT" for short), although, they were not incurred for the employees of the assessee-company, and were in fact with relation to non-employees and purely for the business purpose of the assessee. He submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee with the decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in Arvind Fashions Ltd. Vs. DCIT, in ITA No.3508 and 3509/Ahd/2010 for the assessment year 2006-07 order dated 13.12.2013 wherein held that provision of "FBT" could not be invoked in respect of the expenses which were not inc....