TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1853X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. Amount spent on construction of building in the lease hold land - HELD THAT:- Since this Tribunal remitted back the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh for assessment year 2011-12, it would be more appropriate for the Assessing Officer to examine the matter and find out whether the cost of construction of the building on the leasehold land is revenue expenditure or capital expenditure. AO shall bring on record whether the assessee saved any rent in future. Accordingly, the matter needs to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer. Hence, the orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the issue of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r exploring new market across the globe. Exploring a new market for a specified area would expand the market area of the assessee, therefore, the incentive given by Government of India for exploring the new market is a capital receipt, hence that cannot be treated as income either under Section 2(24) or 28 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). Accordingly, the similar addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted by this Tribunal. According to the Ld. D.R., the CIT(Appeals) deleted the addition by placing reliance on the order of this Tribunal. 3. We have heard Sh. T. Banusekar, the Ld. representative for the assessee also. The Market Linked Focus Product Scheme was promoted by Government of India for givi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of jurisdictional High Court and Supreme Court. However, according to the Ld. D.R., the CIT(Appeals) found that the expenditure of ₹ 1,54,10,800/- was revenue expenditure. Accordingly, he allowed the same. In respect of electrical fittings, according to the Ld. D.R., when the assessee claimed the expenditure of ₹ 98,72,104/-, the CIT(Appeals) found that the expenditure incurred by the assessee on electrical fittings would form part of cost of construction, therefore, it has to be capitalized. According to the Ld. D.R., the cost of construction and electrical fittings cannot be treated as revenue expenditure at all. Explanation 1 to Section 32(1) of the Act would be applicable not only to the cost of electrical fittings but also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n TVS Lean Logistics Ltd. (supra), the CIT(Appeals) found that the cost of construction of ₹ 1,54,10,800/- incurred by the assessee is on the revenue field and accordingly he allowed the same. 7. The Ld. representative for the assessee further submitted that in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee towards electrical fittings to the extent of ₹ 98,72,104/-, the CIT(Appeals) found that it is a capital expenditure. The assessee has filed a separate appeal in I.T.A. No.291/Mds/2017 challenging the disallowance made by the CIT(Appeals) to the extent of ₹ 98,72,104/-. According to the Ld. representative, the cost on electrical fittings forms part of cost of construction of the building itself, therefore, whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xtent of ₹ 98,72,104/- was treated as capital expenditure by the CIT(Appeals). When the assessee constructed a new building, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the cost of construction of the building as well as the electrical fittings has to be treated as cost of construction of the building and there is no reason for bifurcating the same. Both the cost of construction of the building and electrical fitting has to be either in the capital field or in the revenue field. The CIT(Appeals) allowed the cost of construction on the ground that the Assessing Officer has not examined the savings of rent payable in future. 9. Since this Tribunal remitted back the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
