TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st of items of raw materials purchased by the assessee. It does not describe the nature of fixed asset. Therefore, there is need for basic facts relating to the assets in question, if there are partitions, ceiling, etc. or otherwise. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer to verify the lease deed and other documents as may be filed by the assessee and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after allowing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee by keeping in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. v. DCIT (2013 (2) TMI 450 - Madras High Court ). - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mistakes except that incorrect claim of expenses of ₹ 25,000/- to Registrar of Companies. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has stated that since the assessee has objected to the rectification under section 154 with regard to the claim of 100% depreciation on false ceiling and partitions incurred at the rented premises, it evolves a case of income escaping assessment and therefore, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 31.08.2010 for reopening the assessment. The assessee has objected to the notice issued under section 148 and requested the Assessing Officer to drop the proceedings under section 148 stating that the new recourse of reassessment is a mere change of opinion, when the proceedings under section 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e are in the nature of revenue items and are eligible for depreciation at the rate of 100%. He also relied on various decisions including the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. v. DCIT [2013] 350 ITR 324. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a copy of the order of the Tribunal for the assessment year 2008-09 (supra) and submitted that the facts are different in the assessment year under consideration and binding on the judgement of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. v. DCIT (supra). Referring to the facts of the present case, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the expenditure involved in this year relates to partition a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing his own order for the assessment year 2008- 09 in assessee's own case and dismissed the ground raised by the assessee. Before us the ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a detailed written submission and argued that the temporary structures erected for assessee's business can neither be modified nor reusable and in the event of vacating the leased premises, the assessee would not be in the position to remove the temporary structure, but break the same and dispose as scrap. Therefore, he has submitted that the expenditure incurred for erecting temporary structure to the leased premises are revenue expenditure and relied on various decision of various Courts including the latest decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, there is need for basic facts relating to the assets in question, if there are partitions, ceiling, etc. or otherwise. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer to verify the lease deed and other documents as may be filed by the assessee and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after allowing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee by keeping in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. v. DCIT (supra). 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 20.11.2015. - - TaxTMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|