AMWAY INDIA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI V. AO-NFAC, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

SA 429/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Amway India Enterprises (P) Ltd., which filed a stay application against a demand for the Assessment Year 2020-21. The dispute centered on whether the commission paid to ABOs should be considered part of Advertising, Marketing, and Promotion (AMP) expenses. The Tribunal noted that in previous assessment years, similar issues were resolved in favor of the assessee, with the TPO not treating the disputed commission as AMP expenditure in several instances. The Tribunal decided that given the consistency in rulings and the precedent set in earlier years, the assessee should not be required to prove financial difficulties to obtain a stay on the demand.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474537 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 22-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 24-10-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP KUMAR MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUDESH GARG; PRINCE BANSAL
• Keywords: Application of stay

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Stay Application No.429/Del/2024 (ITA No.4181/Del/2024) Assessment Year: 2020-21 M/s Amway India Enterprises (P) Ltd., GF, Elegance Tower, Plot No.8, Non-Hierarchical Commercial, Jasola, New Delhi – 110 025. PAN: AAACA5603Q Vs DCIT, Circle 1(1), New Delhi. (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sudesh Garg, Advocate & Shri Prince Bansal, CA Revenue by : Shri Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The application in hand has been filed by the assessee for the stay of the demand against the assessee for AY 2020-21. SA No.429/Del/2024 2 2. On hearing the ld. Counsel, it comes that the ld. TPO has considered the commission paid to ABOs as part of AMP expenses while the issue stands covered in favour of the assessee. 3. The ld. DR, on the contrary, has submitted that even if the issues are covered the stay of demand can be granted only if the assessee is able to establish the financial difficulties being faced. 4. Giving thoughtful consideration to the matter on record, we find that in AY 2015-16, the DRP has deleted the disputed additions and in the final order no adjustment on account of AMP was made. In AY 2016-17, the TPO himself did not treat the disputed commission as AMP expenditure and the remaining adjustments made in regard to AMP expenses of non-routine nature the assessee had succeeded before the Tribunal. Similarly, in AY 2017-18, the disputed commission to ABO was not considered AMP expenditure by the TPO and the remaining expenditure considered to be non-routine stands challenged by the assessee in terms of the Tribunal order of 16.16.2017 and the appeal is pending before the ld.CIT(A). Similar is the case for AY 2018-19. In AY 2019-20, no TP/assessment proceedings were carried out in the case of the assessee. Thus, we find that the TPO has taken a consistent view except in one year holding that commission expenses cannot be treated as part of AMP expenses. Thus, where the addition is challenged on the basis of principles of consistency and issues SA No.429/Del/2024 3 being covered in favour of the assessee, it is not justified to make the assessee establish financial adversities and then claim stay of disputed demand. 5. In the light of the aforesaid, the application deserves merit and is accordingly allowed. The disputed demand for AY 2020-21 stands stayed for a period of 180 days or till the disposal of the corresponding appeal of the assessee, ITA No.4181/Del/2024, whichever is earlier. The Registry is directed to fix the appeal on 20.12.2024 and there shall be no separate notice to the parties/counsels/representatives of the date fixed for final hearing. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2024. Sd/- Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 28th November, 2024. dk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "