9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 18th March, 2015. In the appeal, the following questions of law have been framed by the assessee for consideration by this Court: 1.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the expenditure incurred towards temporary structure on leased business premises is capital in nature and not allowable as revenue expenditure ? 2.Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not considering and applying the ratio of various decisions of the High Court and Tribunal including those of jurisdictional High Court and coordinate benches of the Tribunal at Chennai cited before them ? 3.In order to adjudicate the questions of law framed, the following broad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. a sum of Rs. 10,08,013/-. Resultantly, the excess sum amounting to Rs. 90,72,126/- was disallowed. 3.5. The record also shows that in coming to this conclusion, the Assessing Officer, in addition to the judgment referred to above, also relied upon the following judgments: (i) New Shorrock Spinning & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, (1956) 30 ITR 338; (ii) CIT vs. Madras Auto Services Pvt. Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468 (SC). 3.6. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The assessee did not meet with success. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The assessee carried the matter further by way of an appeal to the Tribunal, which met the same fate. 3.7. It is in these circumst ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tures, or sell it to the new tenant. As pointed out by the Ld. CIT (A), Explanation-1 to Section 32 clearly clarifies the issue, though it has been inserted the Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1986 with effect from 01.04.1988. The decision relied upon by the LD. A.R. in the case Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. vs. LD.CIT, the facts are not identical to the case of the assessee. In that case, the issue before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court was ''Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the repairs and renovation expenses incurred on the leased business premises as capital expenditure ?'' In the present case before us, it is not the repa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee that, in this particular case, the provisions of Explanation-1 of Section 32 of the Act will have no application. 7.On the other hand, Mr.Ravi, who appears for the Revenue, took the Court through the terms of the lease deed executed between the assessee and his landlord. Mr.Ravi laid emphasis on the fact that the period of lease was nine (9) years and that it was renewable at the option of the assessee / lessee, albeit, on further terms and conditions which may be mutually agreed to between the parties. Learned counsel also adverted to various other clauses of the lease deed to emphasize the point that not only was the lessor / landlord required to hand over the demised premises to the assessee / lessee, after it was placed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prima facie, appear to be in the nature of revenue expenditure. 11. The authorities below, as indicated hereinabove, have not examined, in our view, the expenditure incurred under each sub-head minutely so as to ascertain as to whether or not they would fall under the category of capital expenditure. 11.1. Besides this, there is case law to suggest that a difference would have to be drawn between the ''current repairs'' and ''repairs'', (See judgment in Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Hi Line Pens (P) Ltd., (2008) 306 ITR 182 and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Amway India Enterprises, (2012) 346 ITR 341). 11.2. Furthermore, as correctly pointed out by the learned counsel for the assessee, a Division Bench o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
