9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 1024X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the assessee against the order dated 02.12.2010 of CIT(A)-11, Mumbai: "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance by the A.O. of Rs. 6,99,000 paid to MCX and Rs. 5,00,000 paid to NCDEX on the ground that both the payments are of the nature of capital expenditure. Your appellant respectfully submits that both the payments are of the nature of revenue expenditure and should th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to make one-time payment of admission fee, that because of the payments-in-question assessee had not to pay the admission fee in subsequent years for carrying out business through these exchanges, fees were giving enduring benefit to the assessee, that the admission fee made for doing the business for a long time period could not be regarded a revenue expenditure. Accordingly, he disallowed the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue in nature, that same should have been held Capital expenditure. Departmental Representative(DR)relied upon the order of the AO and the FAA. 2.3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the assessee had made payments towards membership fees of two exchanges Fees paid by it was onetime payment and as a result assessee was allowed to carry out busin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
