Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1324 - AT - Income TaxCapitalization of expenditure under repair and maintenance account - whether entire expense is incurred to maintain existing assets and no new asset has come into existence ? - Held that:- It is not in dispute that the assessee was already having the asset which was reconstructed and repaired. The matter of controversy has duly been covered by the above said law in which such kind of repair has been treated as revenue in nature. In view of the said circumstances we are of the view that the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue is wrong against law and facts and is not liable to be sustainable in the eyes of law, therefore, finding of the CIT(A) on this issue has been ordered to be set aside and the expenditure incurred by the assessee on account of repair and renovation etc. of the Mumbai office and the amount of which was paid to M/s. Romi Interior has been allowed as revenue expenditure. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue. TDS u/s 195 - Disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) - non deduction of TDS on professional fee - non taxability in India under India - U.K. DTAA - Held that:- On appraisal of the Article 17 we are of the view that the same is nowhere applicable in the present case being Mr. Arnold Allen nowhere received the said amount in the capacity as a member of Board of Director of the company. He received the said amount on account of service rendered by him which is professional in nature. There is no iota of evidence on record to which it can be assumed that Mr. Arnold Allen was having fixed place in India. No doubt the said payment falls in view of Article 15 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement and accordingly, this payment is not liable to be taxed in India. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee against the revenue.
|