ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Spice Retail Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4933/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7222 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 12-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIMA BERNWAL
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL , VICE PRESIDENT , AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 4933 /DEL /20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 9 - 1 0 THE A.C. I.T . VS. M/S SPICE RETAIL LTD CIRCLE - 9 ( 1 ) B - I, B BLOCK, NEW DELHI JANAKPURI COMMUNITY CENTRE N EW DELHI PAN : AAACM 0 294 P CO NO.82/DEL/2013 A/O ITA NO. 4933 /DEL /201 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 1 0 M/S SPICE RETAIL LTD VS. THE A.C. I.T. B - I, B BLOCK, CIRCLE - 9 ( 1 ) JANAKPURI COMMUNITY CENTRE NEW DELHI N EW DELHI PAN : AAACM 0294 P [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] DATE OF HEARING : 1 2 . 01 . 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01 . 0 2 .2016 REVENUE BY : MS. ANIMA BERNWAL , SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI AJAY VOHRA , SR. ADV SHRI ROHIT GARG , ADV ITA NO. 49 33 /DEL/2012 CO NO. 82/DEL/2013 2 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER T HIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - X I I , NEW DELHI, DATED 25 / 0 6 /20 1 2 IN APPEAL NO. 406 /11 - 12 FOR A.Y 200 9 - 1 0 . 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ADVERTISEMENT EXPENDITURE AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,07,90,269/ - . 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING EXPENSES OF RS. 26,84,709/ - . 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AT THE VERY OUTSET, IT WAS CONVEYED TO US THAT BOTH THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS APPEAL STAND FULLY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 30 . 08 .201 3 PASSED IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09 , WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL UPHELD THE LD. CIT(A) S FINDING IN DELETING THE ADDITION S BY RELYING ON THE ITA NO. 49 33 /DEL/2012 CO NO. 82/DEL/2013 3 DECISION OF THE DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SAPIENT CORPORATION LTD VS. DCIT ITA NO. 5263/DEL/2010 [A.Y 2006 - 07] ORDER DATED 06/05/2011 , WHOSE COPIES ARE ENCLOSED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE DEPARTMENT FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THE ISSUE S ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. BUT HE RELIED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE A.O. GIVEN IN THIS REGARD. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE AND HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY TREADED THROUGH THE APPELLATE ORDER. WE HAVE CLEARLY NOTICED THAT THE ISSUE S RAISED IN THIS APPEAL STAND FULLY COVER ED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 30 . 08 .201 3 IN ITA NO. 5660/DEL /201 1 AND CO NO. 42/DEL/2012 . THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE THAT THE ISSUE S STAND COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE THERE IS NO MERIT IN TH E GROUND S TAKEN BY THE REVENUE. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE IMPUGNED FINDING S IN THIS REGARD ON BOTH THE COUNTS AND DISMISS THE ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL. ITA NO. 49 33 /DEL/2012 CO NO. 82/DEL/2013 4 5. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING CROSS OBJECTIONS IN ITS APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT DECIDING THE ALTERNATE GROUND OF APPEAL I.E. GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2(C), WHICH READ AS UNDER, WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE COMPANY FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT: - WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND IN THE ALTERNATE, IF ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER 25% OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON ADVERTISEMENT AND MARKETING WAS ON BRAND BUILDING AND HAS LED TO CREATION OF AN INTANGIBLE ASSET GIVING BENEFIT OF ENDURIN G NATURE, SHE SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED DEPRECIATION THEREON @ 25%. 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT DECIDING THE ALTERNATE GROUND OF APPEAL I.E. GROUND OF APPEAL NO.3(B), WHICH READ AS UNDER, WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL OF THE COMPANY FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT: - WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND IN THE ALTERNATE, IF AC CORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON RECRUITMENT AND TRAINING HAS GIVEN BENEFIT OF ENDURING NATURE RESULTING INTO AN INTANGIBLE ASSET, SHE SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED DEPRECIATION THEREON @ 25%. ITA NO. 49 33 /DEL/2012 CO NO. 82/DEL/2013 5 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. ON A PERUSAL OF THE CROSS OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE , WE FIND THAT THEY ARE PURELY IN SUPPORT OF THE LD. CIT(A) S ORDER AND IN VIEW OF OUR ABOVE FINDINGS IN REVENUE S APPEAL, WE DISMISS THE CROSS OBJECT IONS AS HAVING BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. 7 . IN THE RESULT, T HE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 1 . 0 2 .201 6 . SD/ - SD/ - ( G.D. AGARWAL ) (C.M. GARG) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 0 1 S T F E B R U A R Y , 2016. VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT 4 . CIT(A) 5 . DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI