ACIT, CHENNAI V. Sun TV Network Limited, CHENNAI

ITA 1309/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6352 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAILENDRA MAMIDIP
• Assessee Lawyers: N DEVANATHAN
• Keywords: Revenue expenditure

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO1309/MDS./2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE-20(1), CHENNAI-600 034. VS. M/S.SUN TV NETWORK LTD ., MURASOLI MARAN TOWERS, 73,MRC NAGAR MAIN ROAD, MRC NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 028. [PAN AADCS 4885 K ] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) ! ' / APPELLANT BY : MR.SAILENDRA MAMIDI,PCIT,DR #$ ! ' /RESPONDENT BY : MR.N.DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE % & ! '( / DATE OF HEARING : 10 - 08 - 2017 )* ! '( / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14 - 08 - 2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-14,CHENNA I DATED 24.03.2017 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. ITA NO.1309/MDS./2017 :- 2 -: 2. THE FIRST ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS ADD ITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOWARDS PURCHASE OF MOVIES, PROGRAMME PRODUCTION EXPENSES, AMORTIZATION OF FILM AND BROAD CAST RIGHTS, CONSUMABLES AND MEDIA EXPENSES AT ` 117.98 CRORES. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF MR.SAILENDRA MAMIDI, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND MR.N.DEVANATHAN LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF ASSESSEE. IT IS BROUGHT TO NOTIC E OF THE BENCH THAT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE CAME BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL FOR ASSES SMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE IN ITA NO.1340 & 1341/MDS./2015 . THIS TRIBUNAL AFTER CONSIDERING THE EARLIER DECISION IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE IN ITA NOS.1515 TO 1520/MDS./2013 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2009 -10 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2013 FOUND THAT THE SIMILAR EXPENDITURE INCUR RED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE ALLOWED AS A REVENUE EXPENDITURE. THE LD. CI T(A) IN FACT, ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL FOR THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2009-10 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2013. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IS CONFIRMED IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. 4. THE SECOND ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DEFERR ED REVENUE EXPENDITURE. ITA NO.1309/MDS./2017 :- 3 -: 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EIT HER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THIS ISSUE ALSO SUBJECT MATTER OF DISCUSSION BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL I N ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 TO 2009-10 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2013 IN ITA NOS.1515 TO 1520/MDS./2013. THIS TRIBUNAL SPECIFICALLY FOUND THAT THE MONIES RECEIVED ARE SHOWN AS DEFERRE D REVENUE IN THE YEAR OF RECEIPT AND ARE OFFERED AS INCOME IN THE YEAR WHEN PROGRAMME IS AIRED. THE LD.CIT(A), IN FACT FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL I N ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE VIDE ORDER DATED 31.10.2013. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBU NAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). A CCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) IS CONFIRMED IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. 6. THE LAST ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISALLOW ANCE MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.40(A)(IA) OF THE A CT. 7. THE LD.D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) DIRECTE D THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE TAX WAS DEDUCTED. HOWEVER, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT RECIPIENT OF THE AMOUNT HAS ALREADY PAID THE TAX, THEREFORE, IT IS TO BE ALLOWED DURING THIS YEAR. T HE FACT REMAINS IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED THE TAX. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT TAX. WHEN THE REC IPIENT HAS PAID THE MONEY, THERE MAY NOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN CASE, THE RECIPIENT HAS NOT PAID THE TAX DURING THE ITA NO.1309/MDS./2017 :- 4 -: YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THEN AS RIGHTLY DIRECTED BY THE LD.CIT(A), THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE IS TO BE ALLOWED IN THE YEAR IN W HICH THE TAX IS PAID TO THE GOVERNMENT EXCHEQUER. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERV ATION, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH T HE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 14 TH AUGUST, 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ' ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER + & / CHENNAI , / DATED: 14 TH AUGUST, 2017 K S SUNDARAM ! #'./ 0/' / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 4. % 1' / CIT 2. #$ / RESPONDENT 5. /2 #'3 / DR 3. % 1' () / CIT(A) 6. 6 7& / GF