9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 825X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of a real estate, cannot be held to be a capital expenditure. Same forfeited amount received from the same person has already been taxed for AY 2015-16, when the same is returned during the current year on booking of the flat, cannot be held to be capital expenditure. When the said sum was received, the revenue taxed as revenue receipt and when the same sum is refunded the revenue treated it as a capital expenditure. Thus blowing hot and cold in the same breath by revenue is not acceptable. Accordingly, reversing the order of the lower authorities the ld AO is directed to delete the disallowance expenditure incurred by the assessee is wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the business and it is not a capital expenditure. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of flat forfeiture. The assessee was questioned, explanation was obtained however, and same was rejected. The ld AO was of the view that this amount is not in the nature of revenue expenses as these are in nature of advance made therefore, cannot be allowed u/s 37 of the Act. It was held to be a capital expenditure. 3. These disallowances was contested by the assessee before the ld CIT(A) who also confirmed the same. Therefore, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard the rival parties and found that appellant is a company who was granted license for development of commercial colony. On 18.03.2015 one M/s. Vatika Ltd by a business transfer agreement transferred the development right to the assessee. Appellant forfeited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pital expenditure. Further, same forfeited amount received from the same person has already been taxed for AY 2015-16, when the same is returned during the current year on booking of the flat, cannot be held to be capital expenditure. When the said sum was received, the revenue taxed as revenue receipt and when the same sum is refunded the revenue treated it as a capital expenditure. Thus blowing hot and cold in the same breath by revenue is not acceptable. Accordingly, reversing the order of the lower authorities the ld AO is directed to delete the disallowance of ₹ 355999/- as above expenditure incurred by the assessee is wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the business and it is not a capital expenditure. Accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
