9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ged by seeking to establish new facts before us, when the same was not even a suggestion made before the Authorities cannot be entertained. In fact except the above, no submission has been urged to indicate why the allowing of expenditure for shifting of the plant as revenue expenditure in the present facts is not sustainable. We find that the view taken by the Tribunal in the present facts is a possible view. Therefore no substantial question of law - Decided against revenue - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 108 OF 2014 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 374 OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 13-2-2017 - M.S. SANKLECHA A.K. MENON, JJ. Mr. N. N. Singh for the Appellant. Mr. Prathamesh B. Bhargude i/b. Mr.Sugandh B. Deshmukh for Respondent. P.C. : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o hunger strike and which resulted in damage to the property of the respondent assessesse. In the above circumstances there was also an order from the Tahsildar, Taluka-Shirol requiring respondent-assessee to close down its unit. It was on the basis of the aforesaid factors that the respondent-assessee was compelled to shift its manufacturing operation from Chipri in Kolhapur to Ankleshwar, Gujarat for the survival of its business. 5. The impugned order negatives the contention of the Revenue (as found in the order of the Assessing Officer) that the expenditure incurred for shifting its manufacturing plant from Chipri in Kolhapur to Ankleshwar in Gujarat is capital expenditure as held by the Apex Court in M/s.Sitalpur Sugar Works Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... canvassed before us. We also note that no such ground has also been taken in the Memo of Appeal. The only reliance by Mr.Singh is to the statement of facts in the appeal memo wherein it is mentioned that : This area is mostly agricultural area. This area is not covered in Industrial zone . 7. However, the above reason has been introduced for the first time in the appeal Memo before us, when this was never the case of the Revenue before the three authorities under the Act. We also note that this issue was not one of the grounds taken in Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal. In fact the impugned order of the Tribunal records that before it there was no dispute between parties that the respondent assessee had to shift its factory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
