9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain the corporate identity has rightly been allowed as revenue expenditure. Finding no strength in revenue s appeal, we dismiss the same. - I.T.A. No.483/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 17-1-2018 - Shri C.N. Prasad, JM And Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, AM Revenue by: Rajat Mittal, Ld. DR Assessee by: Reepal Tralshawala,Ld.AR ORDER Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, 1. The captioned appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [AY] 2011-12 assails the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-24 [CIT(A)], Mumbai, Appeal No.CIT(A)-22/DCIT-10(3)/IT-288/13-14 dated 27/11/2015 by raising the following effective grounds of appeal:- 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing capitali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the assessment. 2.2 Aggrieved, the assessee contested the stand of Ld. AO with partial success before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 27/11/2015, where Ld. CIT(A) concurred with the alternative claim of the assessee and concluded the matter in the following manner:- 2.4 I have given my careful consideration to the rival submissions, perused the material on record and duly considered the factual matrix of the case as also the applicable legal position. 2.4.1 Ground Nos.1 to 3 are against the disallowance of entire business income of ₹ 2,94,73,439/- on the ground that there is no business activity during the year under consideration since there was no sale. Ground No.4 is a without prejudice statement seeking capitaliz ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deployed. It was further stated that the agreements for purchase of the said flats were duly registered and these facts were not in dispute. However, due to court litigations the project in which the appellant had purchased the flats was stayed and the flats purchased remained under constructed. It was for these reasons they were not shown as stock-in-trade nor were they shown as work-in-progress since it was not the appellant who was developing the said project. It was further stated that as per the Memorandum of Association trading in immovable property was one of the objects of the appellant and, hence, business activities commenced once the flats were purchased and payments were made. It was further submitted that for carrying out the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant, vide Ground No.4, whereas Ground Nos. 1 to 3 are dismissed, Ground No.4 is allowed as far as interest expenses of ₹ 2,94,31,532/- is concerned. As regards the balance amount of ₹ 41,900/- the same appears to be on account of maintenance of the appellant company which ought to be allowed for running of the said company. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 3. The Ld. Departmental Representative [DR] supported the stand of Ld. AO whereas Ld. Counsel for Assessee [AR] pointed out that if the expenditure was not allowable as revenue expenditure then alternatively, the same should be allowed to be capitalized and therefore, the stand of Ld. CIT(A) was quite fair and logical. 4. We have heard the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
