HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD Vs. INSPECTING ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
Pradeep Parikh, Accountant Member -
(1.) IDENTICAL issues arise out of these two appeals by the assessee and, hence, they are being disposed of by this common order.
(2.) Briefly stated, the first ground is that the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in upholding the validity of the reopening of the assessment under Section 147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and, secondly, the CIT (Appeals) erred in holding that expenses which are complimentary and supplementary to advertisement are also covered by Section 37(3A) of the Act.
Since the fate of the second ground would depend on the survival or otherwise of the first ground, we first take up to decide whether the IAC was justified in assuming jurisdiction under Section 147(a) of the Act, or not.
(3.) BEFORE going into the facts of the case, it would be pertinent to note that Sub-section (3A) of Section 37 of the Act was introduced by the Finance Act, 1978 with effect from 1-4-1979. These provisions were discontinued with effect from 1-4-1981 and re-introduced in the Act in a modified manner with effect from 1-4-1984. The avowed objective of the provision was to put a curb on extravagant and socially wasteful expenditure, as it was then considered, on advertising, publicity and sales promotion.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.