9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (2) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... room. In order to create the space for the permit room, the assessee shifted the store accommodation in the said room and in that space started the beer bar and permit room. For the purpose of business, the assessee, however, was required to spend a sum of Rs. 1,33,120 for renovation and decoration. Out of the total expenditure of Rs. 1,33,120 a sum of Rs. 24,000 was capitalised by the assessee. A sum of Rs. 1,08,320 was, however, claimed as the revenue expenditure which was allowed by the Assessing Officer. 3. The CIT, however, was of the view that the order of the ITO was erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. In the opinion of the learned CIT, the expenses on renovation were capital in nature and hence n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the expenditure on renovation was capital in nature and hence was not an allowable deduction under any of the provisions of the IT Act. 6. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of the judicial precedence relied upon. Following are the details of disputed addition, viz., (a) Plastering of walls and repairs to roof to make them decorative; (b) Fixing of the angles and beams to strengthen the structure of the existing store room; (c) Repair of the staircase; (d) Old electric fitting was removed and new electric fitting installed; (e) Expenses on shifting of the existing store-room elsewhere in the same premises; (f) Expenditure on carpet on stairs; (g) Replacement of floor tiles; (h) Repairing, cleaning and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epairs in the rented premises. In other words, the restaurant building or any part of it was not the property of the appellant. The repairs carried out to a rented premises clearly would be a revenue expenditure as it will not bring any capital asset into being. We have also very carefully gone through the details of the expenses and find that, in fact, the expenditure in question is revenue in nature. Taking for instance, the case of carpet on staircase. The carpet on a staircase is revenue expenditure in view of the fact that the carpet does not bring any capital asset into being. In this regard, our views are supported by the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Indian Metal Metallurgical Corpn. (1990) 182 ITR 460 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven though the advantage may endure for an indefinite future. The test of enduring benefit is, therefore, not a certain or conclusive test and it cannot be applied blindly and mechanically without regard to the particular facts and circumstances of a given case. Thus, in the case of the assessee, the expenditure were incurred on rented premises and that too for the smooth running of the business. The concept of capital or revenue expenditure is also a fast changing concept. The issue of capital/revenue expenditure was examined by the Supreme Court in the case of Alembic Chemicals Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1989) 77 CTR (SC) 1 : (1989) 177 ITR 377 (SC). In the said decision, the Supreme Court, inter alia, had laid down as under: "(ii) In the infini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
