TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enial of expenditure claimed being bad debt written off - Held that:- Ground raised by the assessee in this regard is misplaced. CIT(A) has not dismissed the assessee's ground in this regard but has remitted the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the veracity of assessee’s claim and thereafter decide accordingly. There is no infirmity in the direction by the learned CIT(A). Hence, this ground raised by the assessee stands dismissed. - ITA No.4319/MUM/2017 - - - Dated:- 5-2-2018 - Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member For The Appellant : Ms Neelam Jadhav For The Respondent : Ms N Hemalatha ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee directed against order of learned CIT(A)- 20, Mumbai, dated 16.03.2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance at ₹ 18,01,848/-. On going through the details furnished in this regard the Assessing Officer noticed that out of the same the expenses on renovation work carried out during F.Y. 2010-11 consists of ₹ 14,81,003/- which was made on the rental premises taken on lease at Apple Plaza at Dadar and Hi Life Mall, Santacruz premises. The assessee submitted that the renovation work was carried out due to business norms of Autodesk Inc. and at present the operation from the said premises where renovation work was carried out, had been discontinued. The contention of the assessee company was not accepted by the Assessing Officer for the following reasons: 1. For the Santacruz premises the assessee company paid service charges per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expenditure incurred on this setup is definitely capital in nature and cannot be allowed as a revenue expenditure. Having regards to the facts of the case and in view of the Judgement of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Vardhman Developers Ltd Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Appeal Number: I.T.A. No. 6820/Mum/2012 as discussed, the disallowance of ₹ 14,81,003/- made by the AO on this issue is found to be in order and the same is upheld. The assessee would be entitled to claim depreciation on this amount and the A.O. is directed to allow the same as per law. Accordingly this ground of appeal is dismissed. Aggrieved, against the above order assessee is in appeal before the ITAT. 8. I have heard both the counsel and perused the records. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TO (2015) 68 SOT 107 (Mum)(Trib.)(URO)confirmed the addition. Propositions : 1. The addition made is arbitrary and without appreciating correct facts of nature of expenses. 2. The expenditure incurred as repairs maintenance on 2 locations at Santacruz premises ₹ 9,50,772/- at Dadar ₹ 5,30,232/-. Both the premises has taken on leave license basis also taken their existing furniture fixtures through separate agreements. The Appellant Company paid service charges against use of furniture fixtures air conditioners provided by the Lessor as per the agreements. 3. The agreement between the assessee and the lessor specifically provides that the repairs shall be carried out only by the lessee subj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... expenditure the nature of repairs was not of an enduring character. 9. No businessmen will incurred such a huge expense knowing that he may have to discontinue the use of premises therefore it is not the case in which disallowance can be made only on the grounds that the use of premises were discounted, expenses are not in comparison of earlier year. 10. In subsequent years there no disallowance of any expenditure (Renovation Expenditure/ Repairs and Maintenance etc.) 9. Per Contra learned departmental representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 10. Upon careful consideration I find that assessee has incurred a small expenditure of ₹ 9,50,772/- at Santacruz and ₹ 5,30,232/- at Dadar pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
