9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 438X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther any contrary material is placed on record nor any higher court’s order is filed when it is otherwise a covered matter - in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos.1798 & 1799/Del./2012 - - - Dated:- 5-10-2012 - SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, AND SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, JJ. Assessee by : S/Shri Hiren Mehta Sanjeev Kwatra, CAs Revenue by : Ms. Anusha Khurana, Sr.DR ORDER PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. These two appeals of the Revenue are directed against separate orders of the CIT (A), Chandigarh, both dated 13.01.2012, relevant to assessment years 2004-05 07-08, whereby deletion of addition of Rs.1,32,380 and Rs.15,85,580/- being 30% of the repairs and maintenance having been treated as to be of capital nature by the Assessing Officer, re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spect of the hospital building, including the expenses on plastic and while paint, tiles fixing of nursery and OT room, repair of door closer, lock parts, repairs of bathrooms and other building repairs etc. and labour charges on the same. The details of Repair and Maintenance Building filed during the assessment proceedings were also filed before CIT(A). In order to indicate that it would clearly substantiate the above averment inasmuch as all payments with regard to repair work have been made for purchase of building material, paints, tiles etc. Therefore, in essence, the entire amount of expenditure incurred was for preservation and maintenance of existing asset i.e. hospital building at Preet Vihar. So, Assessing Officer was not jus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 24.09.2009 in I.T.A. Nos.1037 1057/Chandi/2008 for assessment year 2005-06. Hence, by respectfully following the decision of the Hon ble ITAT, Chandigarh (supra), the addition made of Rs.1,32,380/- by treating the expenditure claimed on account of repair and maintenance as capital expenditure is deleted. Ground of appeal No.2 is allowed. 5. Aggrieved by this order of CIT(A), department has come up in appeal and it is strongly pleaded and while relying upon order of Assessing Officer it was urged for reversal of the order of CIT(A) and restoring that of the Assessing Officer because the Assessing Officer has not disallowed the entire expenditure, but only 30% of the same and has given valid reason for making the impugned addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment year 2007-08 is concerned, addition of Rs.15,85,850/- being 30% of the expenditure on account of repair and maintenance of building has been made by the Assessing Officer, which came to be deleted by the CIT(A) while following Chandigarh bench in the case of U.G. Hospitals (P) Ltd. (supra). Against such order of CIT(A), department has come up in appeal and it is strongly pleaded that CIT(A) has not appreciated the fact that expenditure on repair and maintenance of building is more than 35% of the value of the asset. So, CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that expenditure on account of putting up false ceiling, new tiles/windows etc. cannot be treated as revenue expenditure. Therefore, it was pleaded for setting aside the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
