Share Capital
This query is : Resolved
02 June 2008
A Company already doing business has increased its authorised Capital.
The Expenses incurred for the same has been taken as prelimenary expenses. Is the treatment right?
The Expenses incurred for the same has been taken as prelimenary expenses. Is the treatment right?
02 June 2008
Hi..
Share Issue expenses and expenses on increasing authorised Share
Capital, being a capital expenditure, should be shown under Misc Expenditure and should be amortised over a period of ten years
Share Issue expenses and expenses on increasing authorised Share
Capital, being a capital expenditure, should be shown under Misc Expenditure and should be amortised over a period of ten years
05 June 2008
Increase in share capital is completely dissallowed as per IT act..
05 June 2008
Expenses relating to increase in share Capital. . . And an u please mention the section that increase in share capital is disallowed by the IT Act . .
Thanking You
Thanking You
21 August 2008
No since the company is already in business therefore exp. incurred on increaseing Auth. cap ican not be treated as Preliminary expenses.
19 November 2008
i request all of you to please mention the case citation as my assessment is pending
11 December 2009
Fees paid to the Registrar of Companies for increasing Authorised Capital will result in an advantage of enduring nature and is a Capital Exp. [Case Law- Punjab State Industrial Developement Corporation Ltd V/s CIT (1997) 225 ITR 792/93 Taxman 5 (SC)].
However u/s 35D(2)(c)(iii) of the Act,only fees paid for registration of the Company is deductible.Fees paid for increase in share capital is not fees for registration of the Company,and hence it is not amortisable under this provision-Case law CIT v/s Hindustan Insecticides Ltd.[2001] 250 ITR 338 (Delhi)
Rgds,
Vaibhav/Gautam
RGD & Co.
However u/s 35D(2)(c)(iii) of the Act,only fees paid for registration of the Company is deductible.Fees paid for increase in share capital is not fees for registration of the Company,and hence it is not amortisable under this provision-Case law CIT v/s Hindustan Insecticides Ltd.[2001] 250 ITR 338 (Delhi)
Rgds,
Vaibhav/Gautam
RGD & Co.
16 August 2010
Why cant we claim that the expense is for the wholly and exclusive purpose of business?
You need to be the querist or approved CAclub expert to take part in this query .
Click here to login now
Click here to login now
Similar Resolved Queries
Unanswered Queries
- CG Tax On residential property
- Applicable TDS for Purchase of Flat from NRI
- Claiming exemption of perquisite for employee-owned car under New Tax Regime in ITR-2
- PPF interest-As Exempt Income disclosure
- Under construction property in ITR
- Gift of mutual fund units to daughter
- Building tax payment deduction in rental Income
- Upload Level ValidationITR3Category of Defect B/D
- Not able to file ITR
- NRI ITR2 account in 2025-26 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.
- Section 194JA & JB Income which ITR Form to use
- Pass word to open justification report for Q1 for FY 2026-27
- PF Taxable Income
- Clarification on Tax Audit Applicability and Reporting of F&O Transactions in ITR-3
- Interest credited in FY2025-2026 & TDS therein by EPFO does not reflect in AIS or Form 26AS
- 44ad eligble money lending interest
- Delisted shares sold in off market/ Rebate u/s87A
- In Exports Sales HSN details where to fill
- Opting out" of regime provided under subsection (1A) of Section 115BAC but Form 10IEA is not filed.
- Difference in tax comparison report
Trending Online Classes
-
DT & Audit (Exam Oriented Fastrack Batch) - For May 26 Exams and onwards Full English
CA Bhanwar Borana & CA Shubham Keswani
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals
CAclubindia
