ITA No.833/PUN/2024
Parties Involved
Facts Summary
The case involves an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The Revenue has raised several grounds of appeal against the deductions allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). The assessee, RBL Bank Ltd., had issued equity shares to its employees under an ESOP Scheme at a discounting amount and claimed the said expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. The Revenue argued that the ESOP Expenditure is not an allowable expenditure as it is a Capital Account Entry. The assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Biocon Ltd. The Revenue also argued that Interest on Broken Period is not an allowable expenditure, but the assessee relied on the decision of the ITAT in its own case for A.Y.2017-18 in ITA No.509/PUN/2023.…
Decision in favour of
Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue
Legal Issues
- 1. Allowance of ESOP Expenditure as deduction under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act.
- 2. Allowance of Interest on Broken Period as deduction under section 28 of the Income Tax Act.
Judgment Outcome
Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.
Similar Judgements
DCIT New Delhi vs. FIS Global Business Solutions India Private Limited
McKinsey Global Capabilities & Services Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi
Delhi Bench 'E', New Delhi benchAY 2018-19AllowedJewelex India Private Limited vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 14(1)(1)
Mumbai Bench benchAY 2017-18 & 2018-19AllowedACIT, Circle 6(1)(2) vs. M/s. Ask Wealth Advisors Pvt. Ltd.
Mumbai benchAnkur Chandulal Shah Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -19(1), Mumbai
Mumbai Bench benchAY 2017-18AllowedFIS Global Business Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi-110002