Samsung R & D Institute India-Bangalore (P.) Ltd. v. JCIT (2025) 210 ITD 60 (Bang.) (Trib.) Editorial: CIT v. IBM (2014) 43 Taxmann.com 470 (Karn)HC) Distinguished

S. 40(a)(i) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Non-resident-Depreciation-Fixed asset-Capitalised the expenditure-Disallowance is deleted. [S. 32]

Tribunal held that section 40(a)(i)/(ia) deals with amount payable towards interest, royalty, FTS or other sum chargeable under the act. The phrase ‘amount payable’ in the section indicates that, such amount can be claimed as deduction in the form of expenditure incurred for the purpose of business. Whereas, in the instant case, assessee capitalised the expenditure. Assessee capitalised the software purchased and the expenditure was not claimed as revenue by assessee in its books of account. Therefore, depreciation could not be disallowed by invoking section 40(a)(i)/(ia). (AY. 2015-16) 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*