Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2010 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (11) TMI 507 - ITAT, MUMBAIDisallowed - Under section 36(2)(i) and 28 - Whether the rental deposit paid for accommodation and writ ten off is a business loss - As per the Hon. Allahabad High Court in the case of Jwala Prasad Radha Kishan V/s CIT [1970 -TMI - 7948 - ALLAHABAD High Court] has held that the payment of security money cannot be regarded as capital expenditure - It was in fact, not an expenditure much less the capital expenditure because the deposits was not made to acquire the selling agency business - But the deposit was made in accordance with agreement for the purpose of earning the profit, accordingly, the same is allowable - Held that when the assessee has acquired the debts which is in the nature of deposits made by the erstwhile merged company for arranging the residential accommodation for its employees and subsequently the said deposits become unrecoverable then it is allowable as business loss u/s 28 - Hence, appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
|