TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 668X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of expenditure on renovation and architect’s fees as capital expenditure - Held that:- The disallowance as finally sustained by him and which has since been restored back to the file of the AO by the tribunal in the quantum proceedings – there is no hesitation in setting aside the and the penalty is to be set aside - CIT(A) has not adjudicated the ground, mistakenly treating the same as covered by his predecessor’s order for AY 2003-04, which does not list the disallowance - therefore, there has been an omission on the part of the CIT(A) in adjudicating the ground – the matter is to be remitted back – Decided partly in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No. 3498/Mum/2010 - - - Dated:- 9-6-2014 - Shri Sanjay Arora, AM and Dr. S. T. M. Pava ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd. 2.2 The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, would rely on the orders by the Revenue authorities. 3. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. 3.1 We shall proceed ground-wise. No contention having been raised or arguments made in respect of the assessee s ground nos. 1[(a), (b) and (c)], the same are dismissed as not pressed. 3.2 The pleading before us was made with reference to the assessee s ground no. 1(d), made without prejudice to its other grounds, and which lists all the five (numbering 1(i) to 1(v)) disallowances on which penalty stands confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). a). Ground 1(d)(i) is in respect of depreciation on leased assets, claimed at Rs.7.48 cr. The tribunal vide p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by him amounted to Rs.493.57 lacs, and which has since been restored back to the file of the A.O. by the tribunal vide its order in the quantum proceedings (refer para 62 in ITA No.405/Mum/2008 dated 31/7/2012). Under the circumstances, therefore, we have no hesitation in setting aside the impugned order and, accordingly, delete the penalty. The Revenue shall however be at liberty to levy penalty on this ground, where deemed fit and proper, i.e., in the set aside proceedings. We decide accordingly. d). Ground no. 1(d)(iv) is in respect of disallowance of expenditure on renovation and architect s fees as capital expenditure, at Rs.92,37,716/-. The bone of contention between the parties qua this ground was for treating the same as capit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
