TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1719
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) as made by the AO after disallowing the total expenditure on advertisement, publicity and sales promotion of Rs. 3,22,29,000/- by capitalizing the same and allowing depreciation of Rs. 80,57,250/- thereon @ 25%. 3. The facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading of optical frames, lens, sunglasses, contact lens and accessories and filed its return of income on 01.11.2022, declared total income of Rs. 3,59,82,947/-. The case was selected under scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were duly issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee complied with the notices/ questionnaire by furnishing all the details and evidences before the ld. AO during the assessment proc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the general submission made by the Counsel of the assessee were not enough to treat the expenses as Revenue in nature and therefore, justified the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer. 5. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessee is undisputedly engaged in trading of optical frames, lens, sunglasses, contact lens and accessories and in order to sustain in the market in the competition with other brands it has to incur expenses on advertisement and sales promotion. The assessee has charged the said expenses incurred on advertisement, publicity and sales promotion aggregating to Rs. 3,22,29,000/- in accordance with the practice consistently followed right from the ea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which are incurred in every financial year. Therefore, we are not in agreement with the conclusion drawn by the ld. CIT (A) on this issue. Moreover, when there is no change in the facts and circumstances in the current year vis-à-vis earlier and succeeding assessment years and the Revenue has accepted the practice and particular stand taken by the assessee with regard to advertisement, sales, promotion and publicity expenses, then the Revenue cannot be allowed to take a different stand in the current assessment year. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Radhasoami Satsang vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [1992] 60 Taxman 248 (SC)/[1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC)/[1991] 100 CTR 267 ....