9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome up in appeal. The question of law formulated at the time of admission of the appeal reads as follows: "Whether on a true and proper interpretation of the settlement dated October 9, 2001 and the joint working arrangement dated December 11, 2002, the payment of Rs. 67,50,000/- made by the appellant to the landlord was a revenue expenditure to be allowed as a deduction on proportionate basis over a period of 11 years and the purported findings of the Tribunal denying the deduction are arbitrary unreasonable and perverse?" The facts and circumstances of the case, briefly stated, are as follows. The assessee is a tenant of a Hindu undivided family, the Karta whereof was Sri Brijbansh Bahadur. In the tenanted premises, the assessee had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a sum of Rs. 67,50,000/- by valid Bank draft(s)/Pay Order(s) payable at New Delhi which, at the request of the Respondent No.1, will be payable to The Insntalment Supply Ltd. in full and final settlement of all inter-se claims. Subject to the Respondent No.1 receiving the said sum of Rs. 67,50,000/- in the manner aforesaid before this Hon'ble Court, the Respondent No.1 accords its irrevocable consent/no-objection to the said Structures in the said tenanted Premises and confirms that it would have no objection to the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) releasing any plan(s) and/or granting necessary certificate(s) with respect to the said Structures sanctioned by the Administrator, NDMC, but which were not released in the absence of owne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e surface of the demised land operated as an obstruction to the assessee's business of mining. The Railway authorities agreed to shift the railway establishment to facilitate the assessee to carry on its business in a more profitable manner and, for that purpose, the assessee paid a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs towards the cost of shifting the railway construction. The payment made by the assessee was for the removal of disabilities and obstacles and it did not bring into existence any advantage of an enduring nature. The Tribunal rightly allowed the expenditure on revenue account." Ms. Das De, learned Advocate appearing for the revenue, did not dispute that the payment was made by the assessee in consideration of the landlord agreeing to signify h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
