9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 648X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee called absent and set ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal by hearing the ld. DR and perusing the material available on record. 3. First, we shall take up appeal in ITA No. 26/NAG/2017 for A.Y. 2009-10. 4. The assessee raised as many as 19 grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition made by the AO on account of fee paid to ROC is capital expenditure in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Heard ld. DR and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of developing township. Under assessment proceedings conducted u/s. 153C of the Act the AO d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the company and may also help in profit-making, it still retains the character of a capital expenditure. The said remand report was furnished to the assessee wherein we note that the assessee replied by reiterating its arguments made earlier which were discussed by us here-in-above. Therefore, the question before us the expenditure incurred for payment of charges to ROC represents revenue account or capital account. 6. We note that the assessee incurred said expenditure as preliminary expenses which includes payment made to ROC to increase authorized share capital and expenses incurred on stamping of share certificates to an extent of Rs. 2,31,240/- which is recorded vide Para No. 5 of the AO's order. Further, in first appeal before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Rs. 50,000/- + Rs. 5,610/- + Rs. 510/- we find in Para No. 12 of the impugned order, the CIT(A) directed the AO to verify the same while giving effect to its order, therefore, we uphold the directions of CIT(A) rendered vide Para No. 12 of the impugned order, thus, the order of CIT(A) is justified and the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 8. In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No. 26/NAG/2017 is dismissed. ITA Nos. 27 & 28/NAG/2017, A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 9. Both sides are unanimous in stating that the issues raised in the appeal and the facts in ITA No. 26/NAG/2017 are identical to ITA Nos. 27 & 28/NAG/2017 except the variance in amount. Since, the facts in ITA Nos. 27 & 28/NAG/2017 are similar to in ITA No. 26/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
