9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Tuticorin Authorities are similar to the case decided by the learned Predecessor Division Bench in [ 2012 (7) TMI 526 - DELHI HIGH COURT] held that the said expenditure is capital expenditure. Consequently, the present appeal is disposed of in terms of the judgment of the learned Coordinate Bench in [ 2012 (7) TMI 526 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - ITA 265/2022, CM APPL. 35348/2022 & CM APPL. 35 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lease premium paid to the Noida Authority, Vishakhapatnam and Tuticorin Authority, on the ground that such payment amounts to a Capital expenditure rather than a Revenue Expenditure. 3. She states that the ITAT has failed to appreciate the true meaning and effect in law of the terms of the lease deed executed between the Appellant and Lease hold Authorities namely Noida, Vishakhapatnam and Tuti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... connected appeals has held that the said expenditure is capital expenditure. 6. In rejoinder, learned counsel for the Appellant states that the judgment and order passed in ITA No.205/2010 is pending challenge in SLP (Civil) No. 35813/2012 and other connected appeals before the Supreme Court. 7. Admittedly, the issues of law and fact in the lease deeds executed between the Appellant as w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
