TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1833X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and involved connected issues, both of these appeals are being disposed off by way of this consolidated order. ITA No. 2750/M/05- Assessee s Appeal: 2. The first ground of appeal of the Assessee is against the refusal of the lower authorities to grant depreciation on the cost of stock exchange card. We find that this issue is covered in favour of the Assessee by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Ltd v CIT (327 ITR 323), wherein the Supreme Court has held that the membership in the stock exchange constitutes a commercial right owned by the member and used for the purposes of his business. It is akin to a license and is entitled depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii). Respectfully following the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which depreciation is to be allowed and allowed the balance Rs. 24,79,630/- as revenue expenditure. 5. Breaking of flooring, False ceiling, Painting, False ceilings, Partitions etc do not result in any asset of enduring benefit. These expenses were incurred in leased premises, which the Assessee as lessee would be using for a limited period. These expenses even if incurred in Assessee s own premises, would be revenue expenses. These are expenses incurred for better carrying on the day to day business. Hence they are in the nature of revenue expenses. The decisions in the cases of CIT Vs Kishenchand Chellaram (I) Ltd (130 ITR 385 Mad), Instalment Supply P Ltd Vs CIT (149 ITR 52 Del),Allied metal Products v CIT (137 ITR 689 P H), CIT Vs O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. The assessee raised an alternate plea that this amount being advanced in the course of business, non recoverable advances should be allowed as a business loss. However the Ld.CIT(A) held that what can be allowed as a business loss is only the loss incurred in the current year. As these amounts were due from the earlier year it cannot be allowed as a business loss also. 7. Aggrieved the assessee is on appeal. We find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Special Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Shreyas S. Morakhia (2010) 40 SOT 440. Respectfully following the decisions of the Mumbai Special Bench in the case of Shreyas Morakhia, supra, we allow the entire amount of Rs. 34,91,528/- written off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooring, False ceiling, Painting, False ceilings, Partitions etc do not result in any asset of enduring benefit. These expenses were incurred in leased premises, which the assessee as lessee would be using for a limited period. These expenses even if incurred in assessee s own premises, would be revenue expenses. These are expenses incurred for better carrying on the day to day business. Hence they are in the nature of revenue expenses. The decisions in the cases of CIT V Kishenchand Chellaram (I) Ltd (130 ITR 385 Mad), Instalment Supply Pvt Ltd vs CIT (149 ITR 52 Del), Allied metal Products Vs CIT (137 ITR 689 P H), CIT Vs Ooty dasaprakash (237 ITR 902 Mad), CIT Vs Hi Line Pens Ltd (306 ITR 182 del) have held that expenses incurred for rede ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
