Jyoti v. Jani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 215 of 2018 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, VersusSAL CARE P. LTD. ==========================================================Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHIandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA Date : 27/03/2018ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. Revenue is in appeal against the judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 05.09.2017 raising following question for our consideration:Appellate Tribunal dated 05.09.2017 raising following question for our consideration: “Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law and on facts in treating the expenditure claimed on account of operation and management rights charges and reimbursement of expenses as revenue expenditure?” 2. The assessee incurred certain expenditure for operation and management rights charges and reimbursement of expenses and claimed the same as revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer, like in the previous year, treated the same as capital expenditure and disallowed the deduction. CIT (Appeals) as management rights charges and reimbursement of expenses and claimed the same as revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer, like in the previous year, treated the same as capital expenditure and disallowed the deduction. CIT (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee. Thereupon, the present appeal has been filed. 3. The Tribunal has proceeded on the basis of its own order in case of this very assessee for the earlier assessment year. We had, therefore, inquired with the counsel for the Revenue whether the Revenue has carried such an issue in further appeal and if so, for what reason. Counsel submitted that the Tribunal has filed Tax Appeal against such earlier judgement of the Tribunal, however, this issue has not been agitated in such appeal. This would mean that the Revenue has consciously not persuaded this issue in case of the assessee in earlier assessment years. For the sake of consistency, it would not be open for the Revenue to do so in the present year without there being any special reason or distinguishing feature.case of this very assessee for the earlier assessment year. We had, therefore, inquired with the counsel for the Revenue whether the Revenue has carried such an issue in further appeal and if so, for what reason. Counsel submitted that the Tribunal has filed Tax Appeal against such earlier judgement of the Tribunal, however, this issue has not been agitated in such appeal. This would mean that the Revenue has consciously not persuaded this issue in case of the assessee in earlier assessment years. For the sake of consistency, it would not be open for the Revenue to do so in the present year without there being any special reason or distinguishing feature. Tax Appeal is dismissed. (AKIL KURESHI, J) JYOTI V. JANI (B.N. KARIA, J)