TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 35X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 48 ? 2. Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that dismantling charges of Rs. 71,748 as of capital nature particularly when no new construction was ever done either in the year or in the succeeding years and even till date of hearing ? 3. Whether the Tribunal had material to hold that the scrapped value of dismantling asset was Rs. 25,000 ? " The brief facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed on September 14, 1982, and, thereafter, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has issued directions to reconsider certain issues and on that basis an order was passed on October 17, 1984. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) directed to check up the written down value as on March 31, 1978, and to work ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he scrap was considered to be reasonable and not excessive, The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that the reason for demolition could only be that the land underneath the building would be required by the assessee for some other purposes. The advantage received was considered to be an enduring nature. We have considered the matter. The assessee has shown the cost/written down value of the items scrapped at Rs. 1,95,289. The details of this figure bifurcated into two, pertaining to written down value of scrapped asset and dismantling charges were not shown at any stage either in the profit and loss account, auditors' report or in the assessment proceedings, or even in the proceedings under section 144B(4). To be an item of revenue or c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstruction which was demolished had stone, wood work, etc. The use of the stones in the new constructions have not been denied. It was contended by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the scrapped assets consisted of only truck loads of debris or broken-stone and broken brick pieces and broken sanitary-ware, etc., which have no value. It was submitted that a considerable amount for its disposal by transporting them across the lake had to be incurred, No details were furnished with regard to the expenses incurred on transportation or in support of the contention. The plea of the assessee that the construction was of inferior quality was also not accepted. The wood-work was also considered as not destroyed by wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
