Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

19. So, following the aforesaid decision rendered by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, we are of the considered view that AMP expenditure cannot be considered as capital expenditure by any stretch of imagination, hence the same are revenue in nature having been incurred for commercial expediency.

20. The next contention raised by the taxpayer is that the expenditure incurred by the taxpayer is not prohibited by law. When we examine the order passed by the ld. DRP it has come on record that ld. DRP/AO have observed that in view of the Cable ITA No.1070/Del./2016 Telephone Network Rules and Guidelines in the form of ASCI Code laid down by the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), the AMP expenses incurred by a liquor distributor on advertisement and sales promotion expenses are prohibited by law, hence not allowable u/s 37 (1) of the Act.

21. Perusal of the order passed by the ld. DRP/AO goes to prove that the DRP/AO has taken general view and has not brought the case of the taxpayer under any specific rules & regulations of Cable TV Network Rules/ ASCI nor they have analyzed the nature of expenses. The ld. AR for the taxpayer drew our attention to section 22(2)(c) of the Cable TV Act which lays down that if the products are advertised on national television to whom these rules apply, only then it can be treated in violation of the said rules. There is no finding of facts by the AO/DRP as to how the Cable TV Act has been violated. Furthermore, when we examine ASCI code it is not a profit company u/s 25 of the Companies Act working as a self-regulatory body for protection of the interest of consumers and is not empowered to exercise any legislative powers under central or state statutes, so the violation of ASCI code, if any, is not prohibited by law. Moreover, AO/DRP have not ITA No.1070/Del./2016 brought on record to show as to how the taxpayer has violated ASCI code, rather proceeded on the basis of general observations.

22. Furthermore, there is not an iota of evidence on file to prove that the taxpayer has incurred expenditure to advertise its products on television or use minors to conduct its marketing activities and thus, the question of violating Cable Rules or ASCI Code does not arise, as is evident from the detail of expenditure given by the taxpayer at page 220 of the paper book.

23. Moreover, it is undisputed fact on record that the taxpayer has never availed of the services of cable networking and ASCI for incurring AMP expenses and this fact has been brought to the notice of ld. DRP vide letter dated 16.11.2015, available at pages 243 to 248 of the paper book. But the ld. DRP instead of returning findings on the facts decided the issue on the basis of general observations by taking shelter in the Cable TV network and ASCI code which is not sustainable in the eyes of law.