9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1517X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench dated 17 May 2013 for Assessment Year 2009-10. The Revenue has raised the following grounds in appeal : "(A) Whether the learned ITAT was right in holding that the expenses under the head plot/site development expenses are to be treated as revenue expenditure instead of capital expenditure? (B) Whether the learned ITAT was right in deleting the directions of the CIT(A) with referenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he land workable for storage of iron ore. This expenditure has been held to be of a revenue nature since no enduring benefit had been derived by the Assessee. In our opinion, the ITAT was justified in coming to this conclusion. The Assessee was a lessee for a period of five years and at the end of the term of the lease, the land was handed back to the lessor. The expenditure which was incurred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... substantial question of law. 4. As regards ground (C), the Tribunal has noted that before the Tribunal, the Assessee had filed a copy of the return of the Proprietor of M/s. Peninsula Minerals & Overseas and of M/s. Natasha Minerals. The Return of income indicated that the contractor had carried out the work for the Assessee. The Department had accepted the return and taxes have been paid on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
