| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0538 (SC) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 261 Section 37(1)
Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT v. Nitrex Chemicals India Ltd. [ITA Nos. 247 to 249 & 318 & 319 of 2016, dt. 23-8-2016] : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 4900 (Del-HC), whereby the High Court held that assessee had not acquired any tangible/intangible asset, which had any lasting and enduring benefit to the assessee's business, that the payments were made for using the trademark and to obtain expertise in the field of commerce, finance and manufacturing, etc., which were needed for smooth running of the business and the expenses were paid only for one year, therefore, the expenses were revenue in nature. The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP as withdrawn, leaving questions of law open.
|
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition - Capital or revenue expenditure - Expenses towards brand licencing agreement and trademark--For use of expertise in the field of commerce, finance, etc.
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT v. Nitrex Chemicals India Ltd. [ITA Nos. 247 to 249 & 318 & 319 of 2016, dt. 23-8-2016] : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 4900 (Del-HC), whereby the High Court held that assessee had not acquired any tangible/intangible asset,which had any lasting and enduring benefit to the assessee's business, that the payments were made for using the trademark and to obtain expertise in the field of commerce, finance and manufacturing, etc., which were needed for smooth running of the business and the expenses were paid only for one year, therefore, the expenses were revenue in nature.Held: The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP as withdrawn, leaving questions of law open.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : SLP dismissed.
A.Y. :
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|