TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1704
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are being disposed of by this single consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. First, we take-up ITA.No. 654/Hyd./2023 for the assessment year 2017-2018 as "lead" case. ITA.No.654/Hyd./2023 - A.Y. 2017-2018 : 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds in the instant appeal : 1. "The order of the Ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, dtd. 13/10/2023 in appeal No. CIT(A). Hyderabad-4/10622/2019-20 is against the facts of the case. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right and justified in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of cost of production of TV serials and programmes as revenue expenditure as against depreciation granted by AO treating it as Capital expenditure?. 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was correct and justified in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of cost of production of TV serials and programmes as revenue expenditure when incurring of such expenditure resulted in creation of asset with enduring benefit because of its repeat telecast value?. 4. Whether, on the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the business of producing and telecasting entertainment/news/information programmes under the trade name of "ETV" and has demerged it's television business into three companies namely (1) M/s. Eenadu Television Private Limited, (2) M/s. Prism TV Private Limited and (3) M/s. Panorama Television Private limited. The scheme of arrangements under sections 391 and 394 of Companies Act, 1956 was approved by Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide their Order dated 15.12.2010 with effect from 01.04.2010. The Telugu TV channels namely "ETV Telugu" and "ETV 2" clubbed together and transferred to M/s. Eenadu Television Private Limited. The assessee-company has filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year 2017-18 on 27.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 42,31,26,430/-, The return of income has been processed u/sec.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short "the Act"]. 3.1. Thereafter, the case of the assessee-company was selected for scrutiny under Computer Aided Scrutiny Selection (CASS) and notice u/sec.143(2) of the Act dated 08.08.2018 was issued to the assessee-company through ITBA portal. The Assessing Officer also issued statutory notice u/sec.142(1) of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s consequential order by the Assessing Officer on these issues and further, the learned CIT(A) has allowed the claim of assessee with respect to disallowance of cost of production of TV serials and programmes which are claimed as revenue expenditure of Rs. 106,95,46,203/- vide it's order dated 13.10.2023. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the Revenue is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The first issue that came-up for our consideration from ground no.2 of Revenue's appeal is disallowance of depreciation on non-compete fee. The facts with regard to the impugned dispute are that, the appellant company was formed as a result of demerger of M/s. Ushodaya Enterprises Private Limited. The company M/s. Ushodaya Enterprises Private Limited is, inter alia, in the business of production and telecasting entertainment/news/ information programs under the trade name of "ETV" and has demerged it's television business into three companies namely M/s. Eenadu Television Private Limited, M/s. Prism TV Private Limited and M/s. Panorama Television Private Limited. In the scheme of demerger intangible asset by name non-compete fee whose WDV was at Rs. 329,76,56,250/- was distr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....genuine, the depreciation claimed on such non-compete fee is inadmissible. He submitted that, on an appeal, the learned CIT(A) upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer in disallowing the depreciation on non-compete fee. He submitted that, on an appeal filed by the assessee before ITAT, the Tribunal vide it's order dated 22.10.2014 restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to verify the genuineness and necessity of incurring the said expenses. He submitted that, during the second round of proceedings also, the Assessing Officer passed an order on 31.03.2017 wherein the disallowance of depreciation on non-compete fee, pending receipt of Valuation Report regarding the quantum of non-compete fee without verifying the genuineness and necessity of incurring the said expenses. Therefore, against the said order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) in second round of appeal, contending, inter alia, that, the AO did not comply with the directions of the Tribunal. He submitted that, the learned CIT(A) order dated 24.03.2023 after examining the first round of assessment and appeals and second round of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yderabad Bench in appellant's own case for earlier assessment years, where the issue has been discussed at length in light of agreement between the parties and provisions of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act and after considering the relevant facts held that, the appellant company is eligible for depreciation of non-compete fee in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. However, remitted the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer to verify the valuation claimed by the appellant company. Further, during the remand proceedings, the Assessing Officer has verified the valuation and also referred for valuation of non-compete fee to an independent valuer in terms of section 142A of the Act and after considering relevant valuation report submitted by the valuer, the Assessing Officer has allowed the claim of depreciation of non-compete fee. In this regard, he has submitted relevant observations of the Tribunal and also the consequential assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2008-2009 dated 19.05.2023 where the Assessing Officer has accepted the genuineness of payment made for non-compete fee and also the purpose of payment while allowing depreciation of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rms viz., M/s. Usha Kiron Television and M/s. Usha Kiron Movies has been sold to M/s. Ushodaya Enterprises Private Limited as agreed in light of agreement, then, there is nothing left with these two Firms or Sri Ramoji Rao HUF to compete with the appellant company. Therefore the Assessing Officer observed that, the transaction between the appellant company and two firms is 'sham' transactions designed to avoid payment of tax and accordingly, disallowed the entire amount of depreciation claimed on account of non-compete fee. The Assessing Officer also discussed the issue in light of definition of an "Intangible Asset" in light of provisions of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act and more particularly, the words "any other business or commercial rights of similar nature" and argued that, the appellant company had acquired non-compete rights which is not an asset and further, the non-compete fee acquired by the appellant company is not an asset since it has no marketing value and it could not be sold or assigned and it does not have transferable right. Therefore, observed that, non-compete fee is not a right that is acquired by the payer, but, a restriction of the recipient and, therefore, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailable on record, however, on perusal of the closing agreement dated 30.01.2008 between the appellant company and M/s. Equator Trading Enterprise Private Limited, the appellant company has transferred 39% of equity shares to M/s. Equator Trading Enterprise Private Limited and argued that, since there is a third party investment in the appellant company, it cannot be said that, the transaction of non-compete fee by the appellant company with the above two firms is, between the two related parties and a 'sham' transaction and, therefore, directed the Assessing Officer to examine the payment of non-compete fee in light of above new facts. In the consequential proceedings, the Assessing Officer once again reiterated his observations and held that, non-compete fee is not an 'Intangible Asset" falls under the definition of "any other commercial or business rights of similar nature" and not entitled for depreciation. However, disallowed the depreciation on the ground that, the valuation report from the valuer is pending. The said order of the Assessing Officer has been challenged by the appellant company before the CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) after verification of relevant facts, direc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, the copyrights of feature film is owned by producer of different films, but, not a single party. Therefore, once the business is transferred as a going concern and nothing is left with the transferee firms to carry on business, in our considered view, entering into non-compete agreement with the above two firms for a period of 5 years give rise to various questions including question of tax avoidance plan by the appellant company going by the nature of transactions and financial position of Ramoji Rao HUF. Although, this fact has been brought-out by the Assessing Officer in his order while disallowing depreciation on non-compete fee, but, the Tribunal while setting aside the matter has touched upon the point in light of transfer of 39% equity shares to M/s. Equator Trading Enterprise Private Limited even though the Tribunal admitted in it's order that, share subscription agreement are not available before the Tribunal to ascertain the correct details as to whether M/s. Equator Trading Enterprise Private Limited a third party or a company belongs to Ramoji Rao Group or not. In absence of relevant evidences, the finding of facts given by the Tribunal to hold that, the transaction ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....held that, non-compete fee is an "Intangible Asset". Therefore, we are of the considered view that, this aspect also needs further examination from the Assessing Officer. 13. Further in so far as valuation of non-compete fee, it was a specific direction of the Tribunal in earlier round of litigation to the Assessing Officer to verify the valuation of non-compete fee from an independent valuer and in this regard, the Assessing Officer has referred for valuation to an independent valuer and obtained the valuation report and allowed depreciation. Therefore, this issue is now settled and, therefore, there is no ground for the Revenue to agitate with regard to valuation of non-compete fee and thus, we are in full agreement with the reasons given by the learned CIT(A) on the issue of valuation of non-compete fee. 13.1. At this stage, it is relevant to refer to the decision of ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in appellant company's own case for the assessment year 2015-2016 in ITA.No.2244/Hyd/ 2018 order dated 22.07.2022, where the issue has been remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to pass a detailed speaking order. Relevant findings of the Tribunal are as under : ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re derivative and often are the means of conferring such intellectual property rights. The enjoyment of such intellectual property right implies exclusion of others, who do not own or have license to such rights from using them in any manner whatsoever. Similarly, in the matter of franchises and know-how, the primary brand or intellectual process owner owns the exclusive right to produce, retail and distribute the products and the advantages flowing from such brand or intellectual process owner, but for the grant of such know-how rights or franchises. In other words, out of these species of intellectual property like rights or advantages lead to the definitive assertion of a right in rem. The decisions of this Court in Hindustan Coco Cola Beverages P. Ltd. (supra) and that of the Kerala High Court in B. Ravindran Pillai (supra) underlined that goodwill is also a species of depreciable right which can claim the benefit of Section 32. Those decisions were based on the ruling of the Supreme Court in CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty 1981 (128) ITR 294 (SC) and subsequent cases which have ruled that goodwill is a depreciable capital asset. So far as the decisions in Techno Shares & Stocks Lt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y. The right can be asserted in the present instance only against L&T and in a sense, the right "in personam". Indeed, the 7 years period spelt-out by the non-competing covenant brings the advantage within the public policy embedded in Section 27 of the Contract Act, which enjoins a contract in restraint of trade would otherwise be void. Another way of looking at the issue is whether such rights can be treated or transferred - a proposition fully supported by the controlling object clause, i.e. intangible asset. Every species of right spelt-out expressly by the Statute - i.e. of the intellectual property right and other advantages such as know-how, franchise, license etc. and even those considered by the Courts, such as goodwill can be said to be alienable. Such is not the case with an agreement not to compete which is purely personal. As a consequence, it is held that the contentions of the assessee are without merit; this question too is answered against the appellant and in favour of the Revenue. 6. Similarly, neither Tribunal in the earlier round of litigation nor the Assessing Officer or the ld.CIT(A) had the benefit of examining the applicability of decision of Hon&#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed intangible assets but also to other categories of intangible assets which may not be possible to exhaustively enumerate. It was concluded that the assessee who had acquired commercial rights to sell products under the trade name and through the network created by the seller for sale in India were entitled to depreciation. 7. In our view, each case depends on its own sets of facts and the facts of each case are required to be examined by the lower authorities and thereafter finding is required to be returned after considering the judgments as relied upon by the assessee as well as the Revenue. In the case Feeromatic Milacron India (P) Ltd. the Assessing Officer had not disputed that the expenditure incurred was capital in nature, which is not a case in the case in hand. However the fact remains that lower authorities have not examined any of the judgments relied upon by both the parties. Therefore, in light of the above, we have no other option but to remand back the matter to the file of Assessing Officer with the direction to pass a detailed speaking order. Hence, ground No.1 is allowed for statistical purposes." 13.2. In this view of the matter and considering the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A) has erred in allowing claim on cost of production of TV serials and programs as revenue expenditure without appreciating the fact that, by incurring of such expenditure, the assessee has created an asset of enduring benefit because, of it's repeated telecast value. The CIT-DR further referring to the decision of ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Zee Media Corporation Limited submitted that, in the said case the appellant itself amortized such expenditure for a period of it's telecast/exhibition considering the repeated telecast value and not as revenue expenditure in the first year itself. Therefore, allowing deduction towards cost of production of TV serial as revenue expenditure by following the said decision is incorrect. Learned DR further referring to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Television-18 Limited 364 ITR 597 (Del.) submitted that, the subject matter in the above case was "creation of news content" which does not have repeated telecast value as against the TV serials and programs and film rights because, TV serials and film rights have repeated value because, it can be telecasted at any time which is evident from various TV programs which have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs., Dharma Productions (P) Ltd., [2019] 104 taxmann.com 211 (Bom.) and Judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs., Television Eighteen India Limited [2014] 46 taxmann.com 283 (Del.), allowed the claim of the assessee on account of cost of production of TV serials and programs as revenue expenditure and the relevant observations of the ITAT, Hyderabad Tribunal are as under : "..... 9.3. Thus, it is seen that the issue is fairly covered in favour of the assessee by the above decision and the A.O. is directed to treat the expenditure incurred by the assessee on cost of production of TV programmes as revenue expenditure. This ground of appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed. Following the said decision, we uphold the decision of the CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds raised by the revenue on this issue." 10. We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, while holding the issue in favour of the assessee in the earlier assessment year, the tribunal had followed the order passed in the earlier assessment years. Further, the issue is also cover....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re the issue has been set-aside to the file of the Assessing Officer to ascertain the correct value of film software library determined by E and Y and allow depreciation as per law. Therefore, he submitted that, the CIT(A) after considering relevant facts has rightly allowed the depreciation as an intangible asset and, therefore, order of the learned CIT(A) should be upheld. 23. We have heard both the parties, perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that, the appellant company has purchased copyrights of various feature films and TV programs and on which, the appellant company has claimed depreciation @ 25% as applicable to an "Intangible Asset". The Assessing Officer has allowed depreciation @ 15% applicable to plant and machinery on the ground that, film software library is a tool for the main business activity of the company and, therefore, in the nature of plant and machinery and cannot be treated as an intangible asset. We find that, this issue is covered by the decision of ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in appellant's own case for assessment years 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 (supra), where the Trib....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns of the ITAT in allowing the claim of cost of production of TV serials and programmes as revenue expenditure as against depreciation granted by AO treating it as Capital expenditure?. 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was correct and justified in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of cost of production of TV serials and programmes as revenue expenditure when incurring of such expenditure resulted in creation of asset with enduring benefit because of its repeat telecast value? 5. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of the assessee following the decision of ITAT of ITAT Mumbai bench in the case of Zee Media Corporation Ltd, when in the said case assessee itself amortized such expenditure over the period of its exploitation considering the repeat telecast value and not as revenue expenditure in the first year itself and whether in such circumstances the impugned order of Tribunal is perverse both on facts and in law? 6. Whether, on the facts in the circumstances of the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entical. The reasons given by us in the preceding paragraphs shall follow mutatis mutandis in this Revenue's appeal ITA.No.665/Hyd/2023 as well. Therefore, on similar reasons, we set aside the issue to the file of Assessing Officer and direct the Assessing Officer to reconsider the issue in light of our discussion hereinabove for the assessment year 2017-2018 and decide the issue for the year under consideration i.e., for the assessment year 2018- 2019. 27. The next issue that came-up for consideration through ground nos.3 to 8 of Revenue's appeal is disallowance of expenditure incurred towards cost of production on TV serials and programs. We find that an identical issue has been considered by us in appellant's own case for the assessment year 2017-2018 in ITA.No.654/ Hyd./2023. But, for facts and figures, the facts on the issue involved for the year under consideration i.e., A.Y. 2018- 2019 are identical. Therefore, the reasons given by us in the preceding paragraphs shall follow mutatis mutandis in this Revenue's appeal ITA.No.665/Hyd/2023 as well. Therefore, on similar reasons, we are inclined to uphold the order of the learned CIT(A) and reject the ground nos.3 to 8 taken b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The Assessing Officer after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taking note of investment made by the assessee in the mutual funds observed that, the disallowance computed by the assessee towards expenses relatable to exempt income is not in accordance with Rule 8D of IT Rules, 1962 and, therefore, rejected the computation and worked-out the disallowance by taking into account average opening and closing value of investment for the last 12 months and computed 1% of said average investments. Further, after considering the suo motu disallowance made by the assessee, has made an addition of Rs. 3,08,907/-. 32. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer by following the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs., Reliance Utilities and Power Limited 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) by holding that the appellant has sufficient funds in it's accounts to explain investments made in shares and mutual funds which earned exempt income. Therefore, there is no reason to sustain the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer towards expense relatable to exempt income. 33. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A),....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f total income and the amount equal to 1% of the annual average of the monthly average of the opening and closing balances of the value of investment income from which does not or shall not form part of total income. In other words, after substituting Rule (2) of Rule 8D, the concept of disallowance of interest expenditure and other expenditure are separately dispensed with. Therefore, the findings recorded by the learned CIT(A) in light of decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs., Reliance Utilities and Power Limited (supra) does not hold good for the year under consideration. 37. Having said so, let us come back to the arguments of the Learned Counsel for the Assessee. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, the assessee has made suo motu disallowance of expenditure relatable to exempt income being salary and allowances paid to one employee who look after the investment in mutual funds. Alternatively, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, if at all disallowance is required to be made under Rule 8D(2) of IT Rules, then, only the investments which yield exempt income needs to be considered. In so far the argument of the assessee that, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lue and therefore does not fall under the ambit of the provisions of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act?" 3. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right and justified in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of cost of production of TV serials and programmes as revenue expenditure as against depreciation granted by AO treating it as Capital expenditure?" 4. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was correct and justified in following the directions of the ITAT In allowing the claim ef cost of production of TV serials and programmes as revenue expenditure when incurring of soch expenditure resulted in creation of asset with enduring benefit because of its repeat telecast value?" 5. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) emed in following the directions of the ITAT in allowing the claim of the assessee following the decision of ITAT of ITAT Mumbai bench in the case of Zee Media Corporation Ltd, when in the said case assessee itself amortized such expenditure over the period of its exploitation considering th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ell. Therefore, on similar reasons, we set aside the issue to the file of Assessing Officer and direct the Assessing Officer to reconsider the issue in light of our discussion hereinabove for the assessment year 2017-2018 and decide the issue for the year under consideration i.e., for the assessment year 2020- 2021. 42. The next issue that came-up for consideration through ground nos.3 to 8 of Revenue's appeal is disallowance of expenditure incurred towards cost of production of TV serials and programs. We find that, an identical issue has been considered by us in appellant's own case for the assessment year 2017-2018 in ITA.No.654/ Hyd./2023. But, for facts and figures, the facts on the issue involved for the year under consideration i.e., A.Y. 2020- 2021 are identical. Therefore, the reasons given by us in the preceding paragraphs shall follow mutatis mutandis in this Revenue's appeal ITA.No.665/Hyd/2023 as well. Therefore, on similar reasons, we are inclined to uphold the order of the learned CIT(A) and reject the ground nos.3 to 8 taken by the Revenue. 43. The next issue that came-up for consideration through ground no.9 of Revenue's appeal is deleting the disallowance ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s offered as income in asst year 2021- 22 based on the SMS (Subscribers Management system) reports submitted in April 2020 by Distribution Platform Operators (i.e., DTH Operators, MSO's etc..) for March, 2020. Hence the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 54,85,832 towards subscription revenue. 4. For all of the above and such other grounds as may be urged at the time of hearing it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the appeal." 47. The first issue that came-up for consideration from the grounds of appellant company's appeal is disallowance of provision for expenses. 48. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that market expenses have increased drastically in comparison to turnover of the appellant company. The Assessing Officer further noted that the marketing expenses incurred during the year 2018-2019 amounting to Rs. 6.37 crores, whereas, during the financial year 2019-2020 i.e., for the assessment year 2020-2021, it was at Rs. 35.16 crores. However, the revenue has not increased. Therefore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h accrued to the appellant company for the year under consideration. The learned CIT(A) further observed that, since the appellant company has not filed relevant evidences to prove the liability accrued and crystalized for the year under consideration, the Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed provision created for liability and thus, rejected the explanation of the appellant-company and sustained the addition made towards disallowance of provision for liabilities. 50. Learned Counsel for the Assessee Shri V. Shiv Kumar submitted that, the learned CIT(A) was erred in law in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of provision made for marketing expenses without appreciating the fact that, the said expenditure has been recognised on accrual basis, though, called as provision in the accounts and, therefore, allowable as deduction while computing income of the appellant company. Learned Counsel for the Assessee further submitted that, the appellant company has filed relevant evidences including work orders issued by the appellant company and bills submitted by the vendors and as per the said evidences, the expenditure pertains to the financial year 2019-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in our considered view, the matter needs to go back to the file of Assessing Officer for further verification. Thus, we set aside the issue to the file of Assessing Officer and direct the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the appellant company in light of any evidences that may be filled to justify the claim of 'provision' for marketing expenses. 53. Next issue that came-up for consideration from ground no.3 of assessee's appeal is addition of Rs. 54,85,832/- on account of Subscription Revenue. 54. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called-upon the appellant company to file details of monthly break-up of subscription revenue. In response, the appellant company submitted that, this subscription revenue relating to Distribution Platform Operators [in short "DPOs] in the month of March, 2020, revenue has been recognised based on February 2020 billing and the difference between actual revenue and the provisional revenue for the month of March, 2020 has been adjusted in April, 2020 and this practice is followed uniformly for all financial years since introduction of new tariff order by TRAI in February, 2019. The Assessing Officer not accepte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the appellant company to collect data before the end of the financial year. Therefore, the appellant company makes an adhoc "provision" for income for the month of March of every year on the basis of February month revenue. In case of any difference in actual revenue and provisional revenue for the month of March, then, the same has been adjusted in the month of April 2020. The appellant company is following this method of accounting for many years. In our considered view, going by the nature of business of the appellant company and the area covered under the business, there is no dispute with regard to the claim of the appellant company that, it is difficult to gather details of revenue from each and every agent/operator on or before 31st March of every year. However, the fact remains that, once the appellant company collects the revenue, it could very well adjust the income by providing necessary entries in their books before finalization of the balance sheet under the Head "Exceptional Items or Extraordinary Items". Since the appellant company claims that, there is a difference between actual revenue and provisional revenue and same has been adjusted in subsequent month i.e., ....