TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HAT:- The legal position, thus, emerging from the various authorities cited by us appears to be that if the owner of a building used for the purposes of the business of the owner, incurs any expenditure in the nature of current repairs , he is entitled to claim deduction of the same under the provisions of section 30(a)(ii) There is space to argue that even if the nature of repairs is such as not to be considered to be current repairs, viz., accumulated repairs etc., the assessee may claim deduction thereof under the provisions of general section 37(1) of the Act. However, under no circumstances an expenditure of capital nature incurred by the owner on the building premises used by him for the purpose of business can be allowed as deduction either under the provisions of section 30 or under the provisions of section 37(1) of the Act. In the case of expenditure incurred in respect of a building it cannot be said, if the expenditure is not entirely on repairs, that fixed capital has been left untouched. The argument that the assessee being already in business, such expenditure is incurred to facilitate carrying on of the business more efficiently and, therefore, should be treated to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of computation of deduction under sections 80HHD and 80-I interest income, miscellaneous income and short deposits should be taken into consideration or not - HELD THAT:- It is seen that the expression employed both under sections 80HHD and 80-I in this behalf is derived from . Hence following the judgments in CAMBAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY INDUSTRIAL CO. LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, GUJARAT II [ 1978 (4) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT] , COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VERSUS COCHIN REFINERIES LIMITED [ 1981 (11) TMI 50 - KERALA HIGH COURT] and PANDIAN CHEMICALS LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX [ 2003 (4) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] , we reject such grounds of appeal of the assessee. Deletion of short deposits received from new occupants from the computation of income - HELD THAT:- It is seen that revenue's appeal in this behalf has been rejected by ITAT in its order dated 25-6-2001for assessment year 1991-92. Accordingly these grounds of appeal are rejected. While the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed, the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed. - Member(s) : S. C. TIWARI., N. K. KARHAIL. ORDER Per S.C. Tiwari, Accountant Member .- Out o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect in the year 1982 and by the year 1984 at the time of Asian Games the hotel had started day-to-day commercial operations. After a few years the assessee embarked upon Renovation and Refurbishment Project of the hotel for which expenditure on planning and preparation of blue prints etc. started in the financial year 1990-91 and project as such was physically launched from financial year 1991-92. The Director's Report for the financial year 1991-92 gives the following details about the project:- " Renovation The Directors are happy to report that the renovation and refurbishment project of the hotel is proceeding as scheduled. The Directors have recognized the last changing trends in the needs of the business traveller and the up market tourist. The comprehensive renovation project of the entire property which has been taken up to meet these changed expectations of our desired clientele involves a complete upgradation/change in the interior decoration of the rooms, lobby, food and beverage outlets and all other public areas. After renovation your hotel should emerge as the No. 1 hotel in the country providing services and facilities of the highest international standards. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ----------- 5. During the course of assessment proceedings the assessee provided further break-up of the expenditure of Rs. 247.07 lakhs, for which alone the deduction had been claimed, in the following manner:- (i) Repairs to plant machinery 73,55,847 (ii) Repairs to building 1,68,61,730 (iii)Renovation expenses 4,91,479 The Assessing Officer completed the assessment for assessment year 1992-93 on13-3-1995. After detailed discussion he disallowed expenditure to the tune of Rs. 2,47,07,000 as being in the nature of capital expenditure in addition to payment to M/s. GEL amounting to Rs. 23,18,695. The learned Assessing Officer found that expenditure of Rs. 168.91 lakhs claimed as deduction by the assessee on repairs to building was paid to M/s. Tirath Ram Ahuja (hereinafter referred to as "TRA") in accordance with the civil contract given to them for renovation of the building. For that purpose the controlling international organization of Hyatt brand name situate in Hong Kong issued broad drawings and specification and the same were later on modified and corrected by M/s. GEL. TRA was assigned the work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remier Hotel in the C country". Such expenditure could not be allowed as revenue expenditure. It was one time expenditure for an enduring advantage attached to the capital assets, i.e., building/engineering facilities. The expenditure was not routine expenditure in ordinary commercial sense. It was expenditure on new facilities for which specialist professionals had been engaged. The expenditure was not part of the company's working expenses. It was not ^ laid out as part of the process of profit earning. The expenditure was on acquisition of capital asset. The object of renovation programme was not to maintain status quo, but to upgrade the profit yield. For that purpose the learned Assessing Officer relied upon the following extract from the Director's report:- "During the year under review, an average room occupancy of 68% was achieved (Last year 66%). Barring any further-unforeseen set backs, average occupancy is "expected to improve on completion of ongoing renovation/refurbishment project of the hotel. "The directors further report that renovated Regency Club has "already drawn an overwhelming response from up-market travellers." 6. On the basis of discussion as aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue is similar to the expenditure allowed in the cases of CIT v. Dasa Prakash 114 ITR 210 by Madras High Court and Indian Hotels Co. Ltd. v. IAC 34 TTJ 526 by ITAT, Bombay In the former case, expenditure incurred on plywood panelling, plaster moulding in rooms and installation of mirrors was held as revenue in nature. In the second case, expenditure on wooden panelling, ceiling wall was allowed as revenue. 6.6 The assessee has incurred expenditure of Rs. 73.55 lakhs on the plant and machinery. The details of this expenditure show that this expenditure had been incurred on improvement in the filtration, renewal of electric wiring and appliances, repair of the ducting for air-conditioners, provision of transformers for lights, replacement of A.C. grills, replacement of electrical and sanitary fittings, like flush valves etc. From the details of this expenditure it appears that on none of the items the expenditure incurred is for acquisition of a new asset or on the replacement of the whole or substantially the whole asset. It is also seen that in respect of number of items, the cost of each item like transformers, A.C. grills, flush valves etc. is less than Rs. 5,000 and as such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 3,08,703; whereas in revenue's appeal the relief granted by the learned CIT (Appeals) to the assessee has been disputed. 8. During the course of assessment proceedings for assessment year 1993-94 the assessee claimed deduction of a sum of Rs. 7,98,32,489 under the head 'Repairs and maintenance' out of which admittedly expenditure to the tune of Rs. 3,64,11,478 pertained to Renovation and Refurbishment Project. In addition, according to the assessee, a further expenditure of Rs. 1,043.12 lakhs had been incurred by the assessee shown under the fixed capital heads in the accounts of the assessee and accordingly not claimed as deduction. The learned Assessing Officer held the opinion that the assessee should have capitalized expenditure to the tune of Rs. 3,64,11,478 also instead of debiting under the head 'Repairs and maintenance expenses'. He held the view that out of the revenue expenditure under the head 'Repairs and maintenance expenses' claimed by the assessee at Rs. 7,98,32,11,489, expenditure to the tune of Rs. 3,64,11,478 pertaining to Renovation and Refurbishing Project could not be allowed as normal repairs and maintenance expenditure or even an expenditure incurred on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sustainable, as in his opinion, the expenditure was in the nature of capital expenditure. While the assessee has accepted the disallowance of the expenditure of Rs. 5,62,280 paid to HBA, as per grounds of appeal taken originally the assessee has disputed disallowance of the sum of Rs. 2,81,525 paid to M/s. GEL. 11. During the course of assessment proceedings for assessment year 1994-95 the learned Assessing Officer found that out of the deduction of Rs. 761.55 lakhs claimed by the assessee as repairs and maintenance expenditure, expenditure to the tune of Rs. 3,48,92,811 was part of Renovation and Refurbishment Project being carried out by the assessee spread over a number of years. Relying upon the detailed reasons given in the assessment order for assessment year 1992-93, the learned Assessing Officer held that expenditure to this extent did not relate to normal repairs and maintenance nor did it relate to accumulated repairs and maintenance. It was an integral part of renovation programme undertaken by the assessee with a view to give a total new look and enhance the standard of the hotel which would automatically result in higher rates of tariff and hence larger income gener ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestigation at the part of Assessing Officer, but on the basis of material on record. If these are the facts then these grounds are to be allowed. So far as non-raising of these grounds before Assessing Officer or CIT(A) is concerned, the learned counsel had submitted that these could not be raised earlier on account of lack of proper advice by the Advocate/C.A. who was representing the case of the assessee. This appears to be the good reason and it is to be kept in mind that if assessee is entitled to get any relief on the basis of any legal interpretation, he should be allowed to agitate the same as income-tax is to be paid on the income which is to be assessed as per provisions of the Act." 14. Revenue filed Misc. Application being M.A. No. 293(Del.)/2003 dated 30-1-2003, inter alia, stating that there was a mistake apparent from record, inasmuch as the Tribunal held that only legal issues are involved in the additional grounds of appeal and the claim does not require investigation of facts on the part of the Assessing Officer. The revenue contended that it was not clear as to whether the amount was expended on some repairs or capital renovation or a separate structure was cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is stated to be in the vicinity of Rs. 35 crores. Obviously the decision to treat part of the expenditure as capital expenditure and not to claim deduction thereof in the returns of income filed by the assessee for several years in the assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer and in the appellate proceedings before the CIT (Appeals) for those assessment years has not been taken without application of mind by the experienced Chartered Accountants and other legal advisors advising the assessee. The assessee has, however, in the course of its appeal for assessment year 1992-93 before the Tribunal sought deduction of the entire expenditure on the ground that it was legally incorrect in not claiming deduction of the amounts earlier and that the matter can be adjudicated upon on the basis of the material already furnished to the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. It is on this basis that additional ground of the assessee has been admitted by our predecessors for assessment year 1992-93. With a view to be consistent with that order we treat the assessee's additional grounds of appeal in this respect for assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95 also as h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quired to be replaced. For that purpose the assessee did maintain the stock of tiles but the same could not last for very long. To maintain uniformity amongst the rooms the tiles were required to be replaced in all bath rooms on a floor. Sanitary fittings would loose shine due to scrubbing on a daily basis. In such cases the sanitary fittings of bath rooms had to be replaced. As the designs of the sanitary fittings available in the market change from time to time, in order to maintain uniformity in the rooms they had to be changed in all bath rooms on a floor once in 5 to 6 years. The mattresses get worn out or the foam gets foundry or lumpy. Some time they got badly stained on account of spilling of beverages and other items. In such cases replacement became necessary, otherwise also the life of a mattresses was about 4 to 5 years. Replacement of mattresses did not result into creation of a new asset. Doors of hotel rooms had electronic locks. Sometimes the guests lost the cards with holes/bar codes given to them for opening the rooms. There was always possibility of unscrupulous guests pretending loss of cards and attempt to use the same for unlawful entry into the room later on. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee's restricted claim of deduction was not accepted by the Assessing Officer. The learned CIT (Appeals) appreciated the contentions of the assessee and substantially deleted the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer but even the small disallowances that the learned CIT (Appeals) sustained, were uncalled for. For assessment year 1992-93 the learned CIT (Appeals) disallowed the expenditure of Rs. 3,08,703 incurred by the assessee on the pressurization of the lift shafts. It was not the case of the revenue that there was no lift prior to the expenditure. The fact of the matter was that the lift was already there and by this expenditure the performance of the existing lift was improved. That did not result into creation of a new asset and, therefore, the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in treating it as expenditure of capital nature. For assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95 the learned CIT (Appeals) sustained the disallowance of expenditure incurred by the assessee on the purchase of new furniture etc. for the mock up room. The assessee had already operated its five-star deluxe hotel for about 10 years. The colour scheme, furnishing, furniture, sanitary fittings and various o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be entertained and decided even though raised for the first time before the Tribunal without further enquiry into the facts of the case. 21. The learned DR vehemently opposed admission of additional ground in this behalf for assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95. He argued that the learned Assessing Officer had made assessment based on the claims and representations of the assessee. The learned CIT (Appeals) had viewed the assessee's grounds of appeal influenced by the fact that the assessee had himself not claimed deduction of the major part of the expenditure and treated the same as capital expenditure. The assessee's claim of deduction was of only part of the expenditure after a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case. There was no justification as to why the claim of deduction of the entire expenditure was not made before the Assessing Officer from the very beginning. The learned DR argued that it was not true that all facts relating to adjudication of assessee's claim were already on record. The fact of the matter was that apart from certain rudimentary information scattered here and there in the bunch of papers filed by the assessee during the cours ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by it for assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95. 23. As to the merits of the assessee's claim of deduction as per additional ground, the learned counsel argued that the entire expenditure was an integral part of the specialized business of the assessee as a five-star deluxe hotel. The nature and scale of repairs and replacements in a five-star deluxe hotel was very different from the requirements of other businesses. These repairs and replacements entailed heavy expenditure on account of having been incurred in the ordinary course of the business of a five-star deluxe hotel. As the assessee catered to high spending clientele, the services and facilities being provided by the assessee in return had to be very expensive with quality being the main consideration. The learned counsel emphasized that by all these expenditures over the course of years, there was no enhancement of the earning capacity of the assessee. There was no increase at all in the total number of rooms and their areas remained the same. To our pointed question, the learned counsel replied that there was no change in the originally sanctioned building plan of the assessee's hotel. After completion of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paper book comprising of 21 pages, out of which first 17 pages pertain to copy of assessee's agreement with M/s. GEL. Pages 18 to 21 pertain to some other matter. For assessment year 1992-93 the assessee has filed a paper book comprising of 142 pages. The bulk of the paper Hook comprises Xerox copies of the bills issued by various parties. In addition copy of agreement with M/s. GEL running into 17 pages have been filed. After applying for the additional ground of appeal taken, the assessee has furnished second paper book comprising of 29 pages mostly copies of agreement and arguments in support of claim. For assessment year 1993-94 the paper book originally filed by the assessee comprises of 27 pages out of which 17 pages pertain to agreement with M/s. GEL and pages 5 and 6 relate to reserve and surplus and details of interest and miscellaneous income. After applying for additional ground of appeal, the assessee furnished second paper book comprising of 53 pages, out of which 37 pages are copies of bills received from TRA. For assessment year 1994-95 the assessee has originally filed a paper book comprising of 33 pages, out of which 17 pages relate to copy of agreement with M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al asset has been preserved and maintained, no new asset has come into existence and no additional advantage has accrued to the assessee." Thereafter the Hon'ble High Court have explained the expression "current repairs" in the following words:- "The definition of 'repair' really does not create much difficulty, but the difficulty is created by the adjective which qualifies the expression 'repairs' and that adjective is 'current', and as already pointed out the Legislature did not intend that the assessee should be permitted all repairs, even though the expenditure may be a revenue expenditure, as a permissible deduction under section 10(2)(v). What we have to consider is in what way has the Legislature circumscribed the expression 'repairs' and to what extent has the Legislature limited the right of the assessee to claim deduction in respect of repairs. One or two views are possible of the expression 'current'. It may be said that 'current' is used in contradistinction to heavy and that small petty repairs are the only repairs which can fall within the ambit of section 10(2)(v). The other view is a view more in fitting with the etymological meaning of the expression 'current', ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egarded as current repairs and, therefore, the sum of Rs. 2,17,182 had been rightly disallowed. On a reference to the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, the reference was answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. In his concurrent judgment Bose, J. explained the expression "current repairs" in the following words:- "It appears to me, however, that the idea which is latent in the expression 'current repairs' is the characteristic of recurrence and the expression has reference to repairs effected with the object of maintaining and preserving the existing and restoring them to their original condition when they have deteriorated as a result of wear and tear. But when the expenditure is incurred to bring into existence a new asset or an advantage of an enduring nature, it cannot be regarded as an expenditure incurred in current repairs." 30. In the case of Humayun Properties Ltd., the expenditure on the renovation of cinema halls was found to be not allowable under section 10(2)(v) on account of not being "current repairs". Subsequently in the case of CIT v. Kalyanji Mavji Co. [1980] 122 ITR 49, the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held that from the expression "current r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s deduction under the said head 'Current repairs'." As to the applicability of provisions of section 37(1), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held as under:- "We might, however, observe that, while disallowing the expenditure under section 30(a)(ii), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has given direction that the assessee be allowed depreciation on the above expenditure, if otherwise admissible. The implication of this direction seems to be clear, namely, that the expenditure was capital in nature and, therefore, in any event, would not have been entitled to deduction under section 37 of the Act. Question No. 3, therefore, is also answered in the affirmative and in favour of the Revenue." 32. From the various judgments cited in the foregoing paragraphs, the emergent legal position is that under the provisions of section 30(a)(ii) only such repairs as are attended to when the need arose can be allowed as deduction. There is divergence of opinion whether other repairs can be allowed as deduction under the general provisions of section 37(1) of the Act. In the case of New Shorrock Spg. Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1956] 30 ITR 338 Hon'ble Bombay High Court have clearly pronounced that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income-tax and Appellate Tribunal Failed. On a reference to the Hon'ble High Court, the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court applying the provisions of section 32(1A) held that any expenditure in the nature of a capital expenditure even if incurred by a tenant on the leased premises will amount to capital expenditure. Further construction of any structure or doing of any work in or in relation to or in any way renovating or extending or improving the building would be regarded as capital expenditure. 34. In the case of Ballimal Naval Kishore v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 414 (SC), the assessee carried on the business of exhibiting films in a theatre called Naval Talkies at Panipat. The assessee had been exhibiting films in the theatre from 1945 to 1960. During the period 1960 to March, 1961 the assessee extensively repaired the theatre. The amounts spent by him were on machinery Rs. 16,002, new furniture Rs. 27,889, sanitary fittings Rs. 5,225 and replacement of electrical wiring Rs. 13,604. In addition thereto, a total amount of Rs. 62,977 was spent on extensive repairs to walls, to the hall, to the flooring and roofing, to doors and windows and the stage sides etc. In assessment procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t would be a capital expenditure, and it is clear that the deduction which the Legislature has permitted under section 10(2)(v) is a deduction where the expenditure is a revenue expenditure and not a capital expenditure.' In taking the above view, the Bombay High Court dissented from the view taken by the Allahabad High Court in Ramkishan Sunderlal v. CIT [1951] 19 ITR 324, where it was held that the expression 'current repairs' in section 10(2)(v) was restricted to petty repairs only which are carried out periodically. The learned judge agreed with the view taken by the Patna High Court in CIT v. Darbhanga Sugar Co. Ltd. [1956] 29 ITR 21 and by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sri Rama Sugar Mills Ltd. [1952] 21 ITR 191. In Liberty Cinema v. CIT [1964] 52 ITR 153 (Cal.), P.B. Mukharji, J., speaking for a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, held that an expenditure incurred with a view to bring into existence a new asset or an advantage of enduring nature cannot qualify for deduction under section 10(2)(v). In our opinion the test involved by Chagla, CJ., in New Shorrock Spg. Mfg. Co. Ltd [1956] 30 ITR 338 (Bom.) is the most appropriate one having regard to the context in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 980] 124 ITR 1 also that if the expenditure is in capital field and does not leave fixed capital untouched, the expenditure would be of capital nature even if incurred to facilitate the existing business being carried on more efficiently. It must be remembered that in every case where a business expenditure is incurred the objective is to cater to the interests of business only. Hence, the test is whether or not the expenditure is in the capital field. There cannot be any manner of doubt that building, machinery and plant and furniture are patent illustrations of fixed capital. In the case of Dalmia Dairy Industries Ltd. v. CIT [2000] 241 ITR 9 Hon'ble Delhi High Court have held that there is no merit in the contention that whenever an expenditure is incurred in the course of the business it has to be revenue in nature. Section 37 itself postulates an expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business could be of capital nature. We, therefore, reject the contention of the assessee based on the fact that the assessee was already in the business of running a deluxe hotel at the building premises. 36. In the instant case, the assessee has incurred expenditure by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years in which the expenditure has been recorded by the assessee. As far as the routine expenditure on repairs is concerned, the same have been allowed by the Assessing Officer. Such expenditure for assessment year 1993-94 amounted to Rs. 4,34,21,011. For assessment year 1994-95 such expenditure amounted to Rs. 412,63 lakhs. It is, thus, seen that each year the assessee has claimed sizeable expenditure as deduction on the ground of normal repairs and the Assessing Officer has not questioned the assessee's claim. However, where the assessee has bifurcated a sizeable part of expenditure on Renovation and Refurbishment Project between revenue and capital expenditure, the learned Assessing Officer has not accepted the assessee's contention. According to him no part of expenditure on Renovation Refurbishment Project can be allowed as revenue expenditure. The learned CIT (Appeals) has by and large accepted the bifurcation of the assessee and granted the assessee substantial relief in respect of that part of expenditure on Renovation Refurbishment Project that the assessee claimed should be allowed as revenue expenditure. 38. We take up the arguments of the assessee in support of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er renovation your hotel should emerge as the No. 1 hotel in the country". The project was supposed to bring into existence "New Hyatt"." 39. As to the contentions of the learned counsel for the assessee that as a result of this expenditure, no additional advantage in the capital field was secured by the assessee and, therefore, the expenditure having been incurred for carrying on the assessee's existing business more efficiently should be allowed as revenue expenditure, we once again do not see much merit in these contentions. An additional advantage of capital nature in a building related business is not a matter of covered up area alone. It is also a question of quality of construction, building lay out, decor and ambience, and various functionalities. That is more so, in such businesses as a five-star hotel, hospital and nursing home, cinema theatre and so on. In such businesses it is not the size of the building that alone matters. The assessee has vehemently argued before us that by all this expenditure not a single room was added. The assessee has conveniently omitted to mention the advantage secured by the assessee in terms of higher room tariff and higher rate of room oc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urbishment' and claimed deduction of a part of expenditure only. The expenditure claimed as revenue expenditure was on items like, providing tiles on the roof for water proofing, door hinges, replacement of floor tiles, providing granite in toilets, replacement of sanitary appliances, replacing false ceiling in the bath rooms, providing new paint in the rooms, refixing the doors after polishing, providing wooden skirting, replacement of wall panelling, replacing false ceilings, skirting in the corridors and painting and waterproofing. The learned CIT (Appeals), thus, held that the expenditure had been incurred by the assessee only in respect of replacement of old items by new items. He, therefore, held that none of these expenses could be considered to be in the capital field. While arriving at these findings the learned CIT (Appeals) either failed to notice or otherwise overlooked the fact that the assessee had already claimed and been allowed huge expenditure in relation to normal repairs and replacements in each year under appeal. The expenditure booked under the head "Renovation and Refurbishment Project" was conceptually different expenditure. The expenditure was undertaken wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... property not borne out from need, but springing from the fancy of the owner is a revenue expenditure. We, therefore, hold that the learned CIT (Appeals) is not justified in allowing any part of the expenditure under the head 'Renovation Refurbishment Project' and accordingly we restore the disallowance as made by the learned Assessing Officer in the assessment orders for assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95 before us. Accordingly the appeals of revenue in this regard are allowed, while the appeals of the assessee are rejected. 42. There are certain other issues in these appeals which we now address to. The assessee has in its appeals for assessment years 1991-92 to 1994-95 claimed that foreign exchange receipts by the hotel at its money changing counter should be considered eligible for deduction under section 80HHD. It is seen that the similar issue has arisen in the assessee's own case for earlier assessment year and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi have by its order in Asian Hotels Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2002] 81 ITD 127 (TM) rejected the assessee's contention. Respectfully following the same, we reject the assessee's grounds of appeal in this behalf in the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
