Log In

| Recover password


Having capitalised an expense in the books there could arise a difficulty to further claim it deductible expenditure u/s37. 

In the Levis case (2023) 30 ITR (Trib)- 508 the company routinely incurred expenditure on supply of stores advertising and promo merchandise, samples, fixtures and interiors nd further treated it as capital expenditure in books but went on to press for deduction of such expense on the ground of recurring and regular nature of such expense.

The AO merely relying on audit report and accounting treatment termed it as branding expenditure and instead allowed depreciation. 

In this case there have been litigation and appeals on the same subject in multiple years in consistency so that it is apparent that such expense is normal, routine and recurring so that there remains no chance for the AO to deny this fact. Even then the Tribunal confirmed CIT(A) order in considering it as brand building expenses. 

At last treatment in accounts is not conclusive and that the assessee cannot be denied a claim only because he has treated it as differently in accounts. This law is settled by 82ITR363 in 1971 by the Apex Court in Kedarnath Jute case. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

error: Do not copy the content of this website.