TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (2) TMI 452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ("the Rules). 3. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs, 30,05,853/- made by Assessing Officer being ROC fee incurred, for increase in the authorized share capital and not for the issuance of bonus share? 4. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 6,86,326/- made by Assessing Officer on a/c of expenditure us 37(1) for purchase of trademark. 5. Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in-deleting the addition of Rs. 21,87,126/- made by Assessing Officer on a/c of write off of sundry creditors holding that the liability is recognized as payable in the books of account of the assessee. 3. The assessee is a public limited company and was incorporated on 01st May 1995. Its shares are listed on two stock exchanges of India. The Company is primarily engaged in providing online and offline services through its portals like Naukri.com, Jeevansathi.com, 99 acres.com, Shiksha.com etc. 4. For the AY 2013-14, the DCIT, Circle 12(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... allowable as a deduction. 11. Since the matter stands adjudicated in the case of the assessee from the earlier years, in the absence of any change in the factual matrix and legal preposition, we affirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Disallowance u/s 14A : 12. During the year under consideration, the assessee had following investments in mutual funds and made disallowance under section 14A as follows: Particulars Investment as on 31.03.2013 Investment as on 31.03.2013 Dividend income Considered for Section 14A disallowance Mutual Growth:Gain plan Fund-Capital 1,16,42,05,068 1,47,55,72,688 NIL Not considered since exempt income was not earned. Further Respondent is not eligible earn dividend income on capital gain plan type of mutual fund Mutual Fund Dividend plan 42,88,75,169 94,21,90,930 8,72,80,782 Disallowance of INR 35,08,429 made u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D. Working enclosed on page no 285 of the Paper Book- Vol. 1.) Total 1,59,30,80,237 2,41,77,63,618 8,72,80,782 13. The Assessing Officer disallowed additional INR 65,99,444 under section 14A read with Rule 8D after consider....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT - A accordingly, ground number two of the appeal is dismissed." 17. Since the matter stands adjudicated in the case of the assessee from the earlier years, in the absence of any change in the factual matrix and legal preposition, we affirm the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue. ROC Fee : 18. During the year under consideration the authorized share capital of the company was increased from INR 60 crores to INR 120 crores to issue of bonus shares (5,45,90,512 equity shares of INR 10/- each issued as bonus shares in the ratio of 1:1). The Respondent incurred an expenditure of INR 30,05,853/- for increase in authorized share capital, out of which INR 270,658 was disallowed which was not related to issue of bonus shares: Normal ROC Expenses (A) 3,813 Expenses related to increase in authorized share capital (B) 30,02,040 Total (A+B) 30,05,853 Increase in authorized capital (C) 6,00,00,000 Issue of bonus shares (D 5,45,90,512 Expense proportionate for Bonus share (B/C) *D 27,31,382 Expense disallowed in computation (3002040-2731382) 2,70,658 19. The AO had disallowed the aforesaid ROC fee e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntation. Such expenditure does not create an asset or an advantage which makes it capital in nature. 23. Relevant extract of the order of Ld. CIT(A) is as below : "9.2 I have examined the issue. From the invoices, it is clear that such expenses have been incurred as professional and legal charges on matters relating to trademark advertisement, reporting and reviewing of registration of trademark and preparation of report, documentation and representing the case relating to use of brand name. On careful consideration of the decision in the case of DCIT vs USV ITA No. 453/Mum/2009 on which the appellant has placed reliance and other materials placed before me, I am of the view that such expenses incurred by the appellant company do not result into creation of new / additional assets or new sources of income but has been incurred to safeguard its business interest by protecting it against any infringement claim by or against it in respect of use of brand name. Restraining the piracy of its trade mark is prudent business decision and so is the payment for its registration which saves cost in future in the event of a suit. Such expenditure, in my opinion, does not create an as....