2013 (12) TMI 637 - AT - Income Tax

Whether the expenses incurred on repair and maintenance of roads inside premises are capital or revenue Corporation has got 1700 godowns which are connected with the roads for transporting food grains - Held that - The godown roads are maintained every year for smooth movement of food grains - The expenditure incurred on such repair and maintenance of approach roads of godowns has not resulted in creation of any capital asset - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of repair and maintenance expenditure by Assessing Officer.
2. Treatment of repair and maintenance expenditure as capital or revenue expenditure.

Issue 1: Disallowance of repair and maintenance expenditure by Assessing Officer

The Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs. 3,68,31,600 incurred on repair and maintenance, considering it as of enduring nature and not supported by proper evidence. The AO added back the disallowed amount to the total income of the assessee company after allowing depreciation at 10%. The AO held that to prevent revenue leakage, the disallowance was necessary due to the nature of the expenditures. However, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) disagreed with this disallowance, stating that the repair and maintenance expenses were necessary for the smooth operation of the business and did not result in any enduring advantage. The Ld. Commissioner found that the expenditures were revenue in nature and not capital. The Ld. Commissioner directed the AO to treat the expenditure as revenue and allow the same.

Issue 2: Treatment of repair and maintenance expenditure as capital or revenue expenditure

The Appellate Tribunal noted that the assessee company, engaged in food grain procurement and distribution, maintained 1700 godowns connected by roads for transportation. These roads were essential for the smooth movement of food grains and were repaired annually to maintain operations. The Tribunal found that the repair and maintenance expenses did not result in any capital asset creation but were essential for operational efficiency. The Tribunal observed that similar expenses were incurred in previous years without disallowance. The Tribunal agreed with the Ld. Commissioner's findings that the repair and maintenance expenses were revenue in nature and not capital. The Tribunal upheld the decision that the expenditure of Rs. 4.09 crore should be treated as revenue expenditure and allowed. Consequently, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the disallowance of repair and maintenance expenses by the Assessing Officer and clarified that such expenses were revenue in nature and essential for the regular operations of the business. The Tribunal upheld the decision to treat the expenditure as revenue and allowed it, dismissing the appeal by the Revenue.