9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on that the FAA was not justified in holding that BNS was the owner of the property till October,2010. The possession letter clearly establishes the fact of ownership of the flats by the assessee in the month of August, 2010. Therefore, reversing the order of the FAA we hold that the assessee was entitled to depreciation of ₹ 23.68 lakhs.First ground of appeal is decided in favour of the assessee. Disallowance of professional fees paid for compilation of Share Purchase Agreement - Held that:- We find that the FAA has mentioned that the AR of the assessee had stated that there was no objection if the disputed amount was treated as capital expenditure, that accordingly he held that expenditure was capital in nature. Before us, the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ores. 2.First ground of appeal is about restricting the claim of depreciation on building at ₹ 11.84 lakhs as against ₹ 23.68 lakhs,u/s.32 of the Act.During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that assessee had shown addition to immovable property at ₹ 4.73 crores, that it had claimed depreciation of ₹ 23.68 lakhs there on for the year under appeal. He directed the assessee to file details in that regard with supporting evidences. After considering its letter,dated 27/02/2014,the AO observed that the agreement to purchase the flats was executed on 05/08/ 2010,that from the copy of sanction of credit facility from State Bank of India it was clear that Bipin N Sagar(BNS)was the owner of the said property as on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion later was issued on the same date, it was put to use in the month of August,2010, that the payment of society bill could not prove the date of possession. He referred to the pages 73, 74, 81 and 91 of the paper-book. The Departmental Representative (DR) argued that there was no evidence to prove that bank statement were wrong, that society charges were paid in the month of October, 2010, that BNS was in possession of the property till October,2010. 2.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find assessee had purchased three flats in Glen Eagle Co-Operative Housing Society vide sale deeds dated 05/08/2010, that BNS had handed over the possession to the assessee on 27/08/2010 (page 73 of the PB),tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ngs,the AO found that the assessee had debited and amount of ₹ 9.2 lakhs on account of legal and professional services.He directed him to submit parawise details along with the purpose for which expenditure was incurred and details of the tax deducted at source.After considering the same, he held that the assessee had paid ₹ 70,000/- RSM Astute Consulting Private Ltd for compilation of share purchase agreement. He was of the opinion that the expenditure was in the nature of capital expenditure.Accordingly,he asked the assessee to explain as to why same should not be disallowed.After considering the submission of the assessee, the AO observed that the expenditure was incurred for sectorial work in relation to change to the intern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was capital in nature. Before us, the assessee has not produced any evidence to show that its AR has made no concession before the FAA.There was no reason for the FAA to treat the expenditure in question as capital expenditure,if the AR had not made the concession. Therefore, in our opinion, second ground raised by the assessee deserves to be dismissed. 4.Last ground of appeal is about disallowing a sum of ₹ 5,872/-, being the difference between ₹ 12,000 (interest)and ₹ 6,128/-(amount credited in the P L account) based on the information from the AIR database. 4.1.Before us,it was contended that the AO and the FAA had failed to take into consideration that ₹ 10,800/-(Rs. 12,000 less TDS) pertain to interest o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
