9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1085X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the revenue, requiring interference under Section 143(3) The expenditure incurred is to be for commercial expediency and that it should therefore not be treated as expenditure of capital nature no substantial question of law arises for consideration Decided against revenue. - Tax Appeal No. 15 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 6-2-2012 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And U. V. Bakre,JJ. Ms. Asha A. Desai, Advocate for the appellant. ORDER P. C. Heard Ms. Dessai appearing on behalf of the appellant-The Commissioner of Income Tax. 2. This appeal challenges the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench, Panaji in ITA Nos.135/PNJ/2011 and 136/PNJ/2011 dated 29th August, 2011, by which the two appeals against the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income from the business. Clarification was given in response to the queries raised by the assessing authority. The assessee claimed this as a revenue expenditure and the Assessing Officer duly examined the claim and allowed the deduction as revenue expenditure. However, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Panaji reached a conclusion that the Assessing Officer failed to note several judgments and erroneously concluded that the expenditure incurred as compensation for afforestation charges has given the assessee an enduring benefit for many years and that the amount should be added to the income of the assessee for the assessment year as an expenditure of capital nature which the Assessing Officer has failed to do. The Commissioner of In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal, particularly in paragraphs 13 to 15 of the impugned order are consistent with the materials placed on record. We agree with them and we are of the opinion that they do not give rise to any question of law, requiring interference by this Court in its appellate powers. The expenditure so incurred is for commercial expediency and should not be treated as expenditure of capital nature. The judgments that the Tribunal has referred to are on similar facts and given in similar circumstances. We do not find any reason to interfere with its conclusion, as no question of law arises for our determination and consideration. 7. After hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the Department, we are of the view that there is no merit in this appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
