In Ita/731/2019 Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-1 v. M/S Rosemerta Technologies Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~71
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 731/2019 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL-1
..... Appellant Through: Mr.Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel.
versus
M/S ROSEMERTA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD...... Respondent Through: None.
%
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
O R D E R06.08.2019
1. The Revenue is in appeal against an order dated 7[th] December 2018 passed by the ITAT in ITA 2664/Mum/2016 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2007-08.
2. The short question is whether the legal and professional fees taken by the Assessee to the profit and loss account for obtaining of new licences in other states ought to be treated as revenue expenditure as held by the CITA and ITAT concurrently or should be treated as capital expenditure as has been contended by the Revenue?
3. Having heard learned counsel for the Revenue the Court is satisfied that no legal error has been committed by the CITA and ITAT in holding the above expenditure to be revenue expenditure. No
substantial question of law arises.
4. The appeal is dismissed.
AUGUST 06, 2019 / tr
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
TALWANT SINGH, J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.