9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1717X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... extension to the existing building, which could classify the said expenses as capital expenditure. AO has not brought any material on record to show that it is an adverse material contrary to the bills and the work carried out by the assessee and the said expenses were giving an enduring benefit to the assessee. All these repairs are done to preserve and maintain an already existing asset. In the course of such repairs, if they have upgraded the facilities by fixing of Alco Bond sheets on outer walls of the building, which do not constitute a new asset or a new advantage. The contention of the Ld. AR that expenditure cannot be covered as current repairs, the same is eligible u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act as revenue expenditure as the repa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tutory notices Senior GM, Finance and Deputy Manager Taxation/ Authorized Representative appeared from time to time. The Assessing Officer made various additions including the disallowance of current repair out of Repairs and Maintenance of building which is contested in the present appeal. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee incurred expenditure for fixing Alco Bond Sheets on outside wall of the factory building to maintain the present structure and also incurred expenditure in respect of interior work which cannot be assumed to create any new asset. The Ld. AR further submitted that the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 17.11.2014 (Kar. HC) ii) CIT vs. TS Tech Sun India Ltd. ITA No. 335/2012 order dated 03.07.2012 (Del. HC) iii) Norma India Ltd. vs. ACIT ITA No. 1971/Del/2014 order dated 29.06.2016 (ITAT Del.) iv) DCIT vs. Ikea Trading (India) Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 5393/Del/2010 order dated 02.06.2016 (ITAT Del.) v) DCIT vs. Ahmedabad Packaging Industries Ltd. ITA No. 2375/Ahd/2013 order dated 11.05.2017 (ITAT Ahd.) vi) Sarang and Associates vs. DCIT ITA No. 1961/Mum/2015 order dated 24.11.2016 (ITAT Mum.) v) ABM Steels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT ITA No. 1855/Ahd/2011 order dated 24.04.2015 (ITAT Ahd.) 6. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Mills Ltd 1967 SCR (3) 957 wherein it is h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Officer has not brought any material on record to show that it is an adverse material contrary to the bills and the work carried out by the assessee and the said expenses were giving an enduring benefit to the assessee. All these repairs are done to preserve and maintain an already existing asset. In the course of such repairs, if they have upgraded the facilities by fixing of Alco Bond sheets on outer walls of the building, which do not constitute a new asset or a new advantage. The contention of the Ld. AR that expenditure cannot be covered as current repairs, the same is eligible u/s 37(1) of the Income Tax Act as revenue expenditure as the repairs were done to preserve and maintain an already existing asset and to improve its longe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
