9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (11) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es incurred by the assessee in defending the appeal filed by Messrs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. in the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Company Law Board ordering the transfer of shares of Messrs. Bajaj Auto Ltd., to the assessee, were revenue expenses ? " The assessee is a private limited company which derives its income from the business of manufacturing auto spare parts, managing agency commission and dividend. The assessment year is 1971-72 and the accounting period is the period ended on December 31, 1970. The assessee was holding 5,852 shares of Messrs. Bajaj Auto Ltd. It acquired further shares numbering 3,643. The board of directors of Messrs. Bajaj Auto Ltd., however, refused to transfer these shares and, therefore, the assessee wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was also placed by the Revenue on the order of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for the year 1969-70 wherein the expenditure amounting to Rs. 15,086 incurred by the assessee in pursuing the same case before the Company Law Board, was held to be capital in nature. The Tribunal accepted the contention of the assessee and held that once the Company Law Board decided the controversy the assessee got title over the shares in question on the strength of the said decision and when an appeal was filed against this decision before the Supreme Court, the assessee, in fact, was simply defending the title which it had already acquired. According to the Tribunal the litigation before the Supreme Court by way of appeal was a fresh litigation an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the rival submissions we find it difficult to agree with either the conclusion of the Tribunal or its reasoning. In our opinion, the Tribunal proceeded on an erroneous assumption of law that the nature of litigation in appeal before the Supreme Court was different from the one before the Company Law Board. It is well-settled that an appeal is not a fresh litigation or proceeding but merely a continuation of the original proceedings. The legal pursuit of a remedy of appeal and second appeal are really, but steps in a series of proceedings, all connected by an intrinsic unity and are to be regarded as one legal proceeding. ( See Umaji Keshao Meshram v. Radhikabai, AIR 1986 SC 1272 and Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhry, AIR 1957 SC 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... curred on the first proceedings admittedly was capital expenditure, we do not find any reason to hold otherwise while dealing with the expenditure incurred in connection with the appeal before the Supreme Court in the very same matter. A number of decisions were placed before us by learned counsel for the Revenue to show as to what is revenue expenditure and what is capital expenditure but in view of the clear facts of the case set out above and the admitted position that the entire expenditure was incurred in connection with the litigation for acquisition of title, we need not deal with all these decisions. In the instant case, admittedly, the assessee was not dealer in shares. He had purchased shares and the dispute in regard to title ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
