9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 817X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Associates for the Respondent ORDER PER COURT 1] The present appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2008-09. 2] Mr.Mohanty, the learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the appeal is filed on following question; "6.1 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT, Mumbai, was right in ignoring the provisions of Explanation 1 to section 32(1) of the Income T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld categorically show that the same are capital in nature. 4] Mr.Joshi, the learned counsel for the Respondent supports the order and further relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Talathi and Panthaky Associates Pvt. Ltd., reported in [2012] 343 ITR 309. 5] We have considered the submissions. 6] Explanation 1 to Section 32(1) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enditure which was incurred was of a capital nature and the effect of the Explanation is to entitle the assessee to the benefit of the provisions of Section 32. 7] It is trite that explanation cannot read dehors the provision. The explanation is in aid to the provision. 8] The expenses as are culled out in the order of the Tribunal are sufficient to imply that same are Revenue in nature and not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
