2007 (6) TMI 149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.401/Mds/2001 dated 29.9.2006, raising the following substantial question of law. "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the upfront lease rent charges paid for taking the land and building at Pondicherry on lease for a period of 20 years for the purpose of setting up the new unit at PIPDIC Industrial es .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ment as capital expenditure. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who, holding that the entire expenditure could not be treated as revenue in nature for the purpose of deduction under the Income Tax Act, when the assessee had treated the same as capital in its books of accounts for the purpose of proj .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ars as lump sum and claimed the entire sum as deduction.  The Tribunal allowed the same on the ground that the expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. On a reference, following the decision of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Madras Auto Service P. Ltd. [1998] 233 ITR 468) wherein it was held that to decide whether expenditure is revenue or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X