Case Law Details
Moldtek Packaging Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
Conclusion: AO was justified in treating the payment to ROC for increase in capital as capital expenditure as ROC expenses was fees for enhancement of capital.
Held: In the instant case, assessee had claimed ROC expenses in the profit and loss account u/s. 35D of Rs.58,500. However, AO disallowed the same. It was held that the issue had rightly been decided by CIT(A) on relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Brookbond India Limited Vs. CIT and Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Vs. CIT 225 ITR 792 (SC) wherein it was held that the ROC expenses as fees for enhancement of capital was not a revenue expenditure. Thus, AO was justified in treating the payment to ROC for increase in capital as capital expenditure.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax-10, Hyderabad order dt. 30.12.2016 passed in case No. 0120/CIT(A)-10/2016-17 raising the following grounds of appeal :
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
