9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eads as under: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.1,32,00,228/- made on account of repairs and maintenance." 2.1 Facts of the case, in brief, are that the Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings observed that the assessee company has incurred repair and maintenance including renovation expenses of building at Rs.63,02,936/-, machinery and equipment at Rs.74,50,202/- and others amounting to Rs.1,37,82,221/- totalling to Rs.2,75,35,359/- as against the total expenditure of Rs.2,37,61,507/- in the preceding assessment year. From the various details furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer noted that a sum of Rs.6,15,22 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rs.4,65,875/- paid to Prasad Engineers as capital in nature on the ground that the same has been incurred either to acquire asset or towards major repair. 2.4 Similarly, he treated an amount of Rs.1,03,57,126/- out of the expenses towards repairs of leased office premises as capital in nature on the ground that they have been incurred either to acquire asset or towards major repairs/renovation. The Assessing Officer further treated the amount of Rs.10,19,287/- being expenditure incurred by the assessee on the leased premises at Lintas 4th Floor. The Assessing Officer also treated the amount of Rs.6,15,227/- being expenditure incurred in respect of flat owned by the assessee as capital in nature in view of the decision in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in the light of the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Amway Enterprises reported in 301 ITR 1(AT). Accordingly, this issue is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law and after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. So far as the other items are concerned, in view of our decision in assesse's own case vide ITA No.1680/Mum/2006 for the Assessment Year 1997- 98, we hold that the above expenditure incurred by the assessee on account of repairs have to be held as revenue in nature. The ground raised by the revenue is accordingly partly allowed for statistical purpose. 7. Grounds of appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.3,17,090/- made on account of notional interest" 11.1 Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee has given inter corporate deposits to various companies. From the perusal of the details filed by the assessee, The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has given short term deposits to various companies and received interest at varying rates from 11.75% to16.5%. He asked the assessee to explain why they have received different interest rate from different companies and sometimes different rate from the same companies. It was explained by the assessee that the same is due to the interest rates offered by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on income which has been received by the assessee or accrued to it. Tax cannot be levied on an assessee on the ground that other person would have paid to bank higher rate of interest. By saving of income by a third party, the assessee, in our opinion, cannot be liable to pay tax. In this view of the matter and in view of acceptance of the order of the CIT(A) by the revenue on this issue in the preceding year, the order of the CIT(A) on this issue is upheld. The ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. 14. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose. ITA No. 1601/Mum/200ITA 2006 (Assessment Year 1999-00) 15. Grounds of appeal no.1 reads as under: "On the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
