TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 903
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....10/2017 on different grounds of appeal. 2.1 Facts in brief are that the assessee being resident corporate entity was assessed for impugned AY on 19/06/2014 u/s 143(3) by Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle 9(3), Mumbai [AO] at Rs. 72.25 Crores after certain additions / disallowances as against revised returned income of Rs. 52.03 Crores e-filed by the assessee on 24/07/2013. The assessee had claimed an expenditure of Rs. 13.38 Lacs u/s 35D, being 1/5th of expenditure of Rs. 66.93 Lacs incurred by the assessee during impugned AY on account of increase in share capital. The same being capital in nature, was disallowed in terms of ratio of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in Brooke Bond (I) Ltd. Vs CIT [255 ITR 798]. The stated issue at....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....AR] submitted that the assessee's claim, on merits, was allowable in terms of decision of jurisdictional High Court as well as Hon'ble Apex Court and nonconsideration of the same constitute mistake apparent from record in terms of judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in ACIT Vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd. [305 ITR 227]. It has also been submitted that there was no bar on appellate authorities to consider the new claim if the same was admissible to the assessee. Per Contra, Ld. DR relied upon the impugned order and submitted that the claim, on merits, was not allowable in terms of judgement of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in CIT Vs. Ajit Mills Ltd. [210 ITR 658] as well as decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vel beyond the record to see whether the judgment is correct or not. An error apparent on the face of the record means an error which strikes on mere looking and does not need long drawn out process of reasoning on points where there may conceivably be two opinions. Such error should not require any extraneous matter to show its incorrectness. To put it differently, it should be so manifest and clear that no Court would permit it to remain on record. If the view accepted by the Court in the original judgment is one of the possible views, the case cannot be said to be covered by an error apparent on the face of the record. Finally, it was held by Apex Court that non-consideration of a decision of Jurisdictional Court or of the Supreme Cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rves is merely a reallocation of company's funds and there is no inflow of fresh funds or increase in the capital employed. Therefore, it could not be said that the company acquired a benefit or advantage of enduring nature. The total funds available with the company will remain the same and the issue of bonus shares would not result in expansion of capital base of the company. Therefore, expenditure incurred on issuance of bonus shares would be revenue expenditure. The ratio of this decision has subsequently been followed by Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the cited decision of CIT Vs WMI Cranes Ltd. The factual matrix of Jaya Hind Industries Ltd. Vs CIT [25 Taxman 36] is distinguishable and do not apply to the facts of the present c....