TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (8) TMI 38
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that in the relevant assessment year the assessee had filed its return declaring income of Rs. 16,35,40,070/-. It was engaged in the business of hotel running and financial/portfolio management. During the year under consideration it had shown income from house property and business. The assessment was completed at a total income of Rs. 18,28,46,328/- as under: Income from house property Rent received from commercial center 4,78,83,525/- Less: 30% deduction u/s 24(a) 1,43,65,057/- 3,35,18,468/- Assessed income under the head "Income from House property" Income from Business: Business income returned before set off B/F losses 13,1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 99,31,096/- towards depreciation on the basis of a finding given in the block assessment order." 3. Brief facts apropos ground nos. 1 & 2 are that assessee had credited in its P&L A/c sub-license fee and services charges of Rs. 7,43,56,245/-. The AO noticed that assessee had reduced its receipts from business income and declared it under the head "Income from house property". He observed that details were called for, as this issue came in preceding year also. He observed that assessee had entered into sub-license agreement dated 27-9-2008 with Mitsui & Co. India Pvt. Ltd. for letting out its Metropolitan centre at Bangla Sahib Road, New Delhi. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the tenant nor claimed any deduction of any expens.es for such services; What was received from the tenant under the two agreements was rent for letting out of the premises. Even the tenant has deducted tax at source from the entire amount treating it as rent and not as services charges u/s 194(c). The 1d. CIT(A),after considering facts and circumstance of the case, treated the entire amount as rent and held that the assessee was entitled to full deduction towards repairs u/s 24 of the LT. Act. The Id. CIT(A) observed as under:- "1 have considered the facts and circumstances, the reasoning of the AO and the submission of the assessee. After considering the same 1 am. of the opinion that though two agreements had been made for sublicense ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o M/s Atul Sharma & Associates was treated as expenses not paid wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business in the preceding assessment years and was disallowed u/s 37 of the I.T. Act. He, accordingly, made an addition of Rs. 14,33,347/-. 4.1. Ld. CIT(A) following the Tribunal's order in assessee's own case for AY 2007-08 (supra), allowed the assessee's claim by observing as under:. 17. The revenue has brought the issue hi appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, drew our attention to the detail of litigation expenses in all three years and contended that all the expenses were .incurred by ,the company in respect of litigation carried ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8/-. The AO observed that in assessee's case in the block assessment order u/s 158BC dated 29-11-02, this issue was considered and disallowance out of depreciation was made on the assets which were considered unexplained. This disallowance was made in subsequent assessment years by the AO. He withdrew the excessive depreciation as per calculation given in the chart enclosed as annexure 2 to the tune of Rs. 99,31,096/- and made the addition accordingly. 5.1. In appeal, the ld. CIT(A), following ITAT's order for earlier years, allowed the claim of the assessee by observing as under: "21. The revenue is aggrieved and has brought the issue in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. During the course of hearing, a copy of order of ITA T '....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed above. The said order has been confirmed by ITAT and disallowance of depreciation or of expenses claimed to be incurred on construction has not been sustained The assessee has placed all the relevant material on record to justify cost of construction. In the above circumstances, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) deleting the disallowance on depreciation in all the years before us. 5.2. We have heard rival submissions. The order of the ld. CIT(A) on the issue in question being in conformity with the orders of the ITAT for earlier years and there being no change in facts and circumstances, we see no reason to interfere in the order of ld. CIT(A) on the issue in question. Ground no. 4 is dismissed. 6. In the result, revenue's appeal ....