9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nos. 200/Nag/2002, 107/Nag/2003, 108/Nag/2003 and 201/Nag/2002. 3. The respondent in above appeals is the successor of M/s Shriram Builders (hereinafter referred to as 'Assessee') who was the civil contractor and builder. On 4.8.1996 the assessee entered into a development agreement with Bharat Kheta and others for development of business complex on their land situated on Kingsway Civil Lines, Nagpur. As per the said agreement, the assessee was given development rights to construct multistoreyed commercial complex at their cost as per the sanctioned plan. The consideration agreed to be paid by the assessee to Khetas was Rs. 3.81 crorers for which post dated cheques were given. There were 21 tenants in the said premises. It was the responsi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00 allowing the expenditure as claimed. 5. Thereafter Commissioner of Income-tax on the basis of the said objection issued notice under section 263 for assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99 proposing to revise the orders passed under Section 143 (3). The assessee objected and claimed that he did not derive any title in the property of Khetas at any point of time and hence the expenditure incurred on vacating tenants could not be taken as expenditure for improving the title of the assessee. The assessee also claimed that the expenditure incurred did not create any stock in trade or work in progress belonging to the assessee. The assessee also contended that consistently and regularly he was following the same method for claiming expenses on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and (III) The expenditure of vacating the tenants as and when incurred was claimed as the revenue expenditure and accepted by the department during the earlier assessment years. (IV) Commissioner of Income-tax has not pointed out as to what was wrong in the method of accounting followed by the assessee. It would not be equitable to permit the revenue to take different stand than what was taken by it in the earlier years. The view taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax that the expenditure in question has to be added to the cost of project and same has to be set off in the income of the project in the year of sale was neither tenable nor practicable. (V) The expenditure incurred in getting the tenants vacated did not in any way improve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
