9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1717X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als) erred has erred in uphold a disallowance of Rs. 55,70,068/- (Net of Depreciation) out of Repair and Maintenance to Building. " 3. During the Financial Year relevant to Assessment Year 2010-11, the assessee company was engaged in the business of manufacturing of gears and shaft. The assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 24,02,33,040/- on 14/10/2010. Notice u/s 143(2) was sent on 29/09/2011. The case was manually selected for scrutiny and again notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) was issued on 12/09/2012. Subsequently, notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) were issued on 31/10/2012. In compliance to the statutory notices Senior GM, Finance and Deputy Manager Taxation/ Authorized Representative appeared from time to time. The Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the real test is whether all those acts constitute replacing the existing asset. The existing asset is the building. When no extra space was added on account of such repairs, it cannot be said that a new asset has come into existence. 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, then that would not constitute a new asset or a new advantage. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: i) CIT vs. M/s MAC Charles (India) Ltd. ITA No. 488/2009 order dated 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) Nor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. DR relied upon the order of the CIT(A) and assessment order. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note 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. The assessee incurred expenditure only for keeping an existing asset into its present condition. Besides this, the assessee has not carried out any extension to the existing building, which could classify the said expenses as capital expenditure. The Assessing Officer has not brought any material on record to show that it is an adverse material contrary to the bills and the work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
