Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.25 seconds)

Lg Electronics India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs Acit, Noida on 18 July, 2018

29. We find that the Special Bench of the Tribunal (majority view) in M/s L.G. Electronics India (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra) held that the expenses in connection with the sales do not lead to brand promotion and thus cannot be brought within the ambit of advertisement, marketing and promotion expenses for determining the cost/value of the international transaction. In view thereof, we direct the Assessing officer to exclude the expenses incurred by the assessee in connection with the sales totaling Rs. 5500.86 lacs as the same do not fall within the ambit of AMP expenses and hence not to be considered for computing the cost/ value of international transaction. The assessee vide ground no. 4 had raised the issue against disallowance of consumer market research expenses of Rs. 567.49 lacs. In view of our decisions in allowing the claim of the assessee being relatable to sales promotion expenses, this ground of appeal is thus allowed."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 61 - Cited by 13 - Full Document

M/S Madras Industrial ... vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Tamil ... on 4 April, 1997

Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) again allowed the appeal of assessee and grant the deduction of the total expenses. Appeal to the Tribunal by the Revenue was dismissed. Revenue carried the matter in appeal before the Hon'ble High Court. The Hon'ble High Court relying upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corp. Ltd. vs. C.I.T. 225 ITR 802 has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. Hon'ble High Court has observed that revenue expenditure which is incurred and exclusively for the purpose of business must be allowed in its entirety in the year in which it is incurred. It cannot be spread over a number of years even if the assessee has written it off in his books over a period of years.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 445 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. on 7 April, 2008

11. On Revenue's Appeal in this regard the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in I.T.A. No. 956 of 2010 held that "it is very fairly agreed to by the Ld. Counsel for the parties that the controversy is covered by the decision of the C.I.T. vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. (2008) 306 ITR 42 (Delhi) whereby the appeal preferred by the revenue has been dismissed." . Considering the same, the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that the present appeal stands dismissed.
Delhi High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 199 - V B Gupta - Full Document

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), ... vs Dcit, Circle- 2(2)(1), International ... on 2 September, 2019

6.4 From the above, we find that the Tribunal in the case of Canon India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (Supra) and Glaxo Smitkline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. (Supra) has considered the Special Bench decision in LG Electronics (Supra). Respectfully following the Special Bench decision the legal grounds were decided against the assessee and as a consequence thereof the relevant ground raised in the memo of appeal, touching the legal grounds were dismissed. Following the same ratio, we also dismiss the legal grounds raised by the assessee in the memo of appeal.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 69 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1   2 Next