TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 1625
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sment order dated 30.03.2016 passed by the AO under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. The assessee has also filed cross objection in the appeal of the Revenue. 3. We shall first take up Revenue's appeal in ITA No. 1696/Ahd/2017 concerning AY 2012-13. 4. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read as under: "(a) That the ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 3,69,76,400/- u/s. 14A r.w.s. 8D to the extent of exempt income i.e. Rs. 7,38,000/-. (b) That the ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in considering the amount of Rs. 39,71,468/- revenue expenditure on account of professional and legal fees." 5. As per Ground No. 1, the Revenue has challenged the action of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....TR 692 (Delhi) wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court has categorically ruled that disallowance under S. 14A of the Act cannot exceed the amount of tax exempt income. Notably, the SLP filed against the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in Chettinad Logistics (supra) has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd. (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC). Hence, in conformity with the judicial precedents, we find substantial merit in the conclusion drawn by the CIT(A) for limiting the disallowance to the extent of exempt income. Hence, we decline to interfere. 7. In the result, Ground No. 1 of the Revenue is dismissed. 8. As per Ground No. 2, the Revenue has challenged the action of the CIT(A) for c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icer has observed that the Appellant has made payment for getting ROCP Report to note the market share of the Company in ROCP Product which can help Appellant to make future business strategy hence same is capital expenditure. It was also argued that amount of Rs. 77,43,374/- has been paid for AC Nielsen Org Marg Pvt. Limited for subscription cost of two years hence same proves that Appellant has benefit over the period. On this basis, Assessing Officer treated the expenditure as capital expenditure. On the other hand, Appellant has argued that professional fees paid by Appellant helps it in obtaining information regarding market share of Company in ROCP Product and same will help Appellant to get update for existing market situation of exi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... similar circumstances held that expenditure incurred for obtaining report on reorganization of its core business and for improving market share and profitability is allowable as revenue expenditure. Considering these facts, expenditure incurred by Appellant is allowable as revenue expenditure. As entire expenditure is allowed as revenue expenditure, alternate claim of Appellant regarding allowability of depreciation on such expenditure does not survive. The ground of the appellant is allowed." Following the above order the disallowance made by AO treating professional and legal fees as capital expenditure is deleted and appellant gets relief of Rs. 39,71,468/-. Thus this ground of appeal is allowed." 10. The CIT(A), in our view, has ....