TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 1235
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ITA No.616/M/2014 for A.Y. 2005-06. 2. This is the second round of appeal before us. The Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble ITAT in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2007-08 without appreciating that the decision of Hon'ble ITAT has not been accepted by the Department and appeal to Hon'ble Bombay High Court has been filed u/s.260A of the IT Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the expenditure on creation of new cabins in business centre as revenue expenditure without appreciating that the AO had rightly treated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ars travelled to the Tribunal and the Tribunal set aside the same to the file of the AO for denovo adjudication directing as under: "We find, the Ld. CIT(A) while allowing the claim of the assessee merely relied on the arguments of the assessee that the incurrence of the expenses and the genuineness of payments to various parties are not doubted. According to the Ld. CIT(A) the property belongs to MMTC and the assessee has to make some changes in the existing furniture as per the need of the tenant and no new asset has come into existence. However, the facts submitted by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee reveal that it is a joint venture between the assessee and MMTC to run a business centre. The assessee has not made any changes in the pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nable, particularly when the furniture and fixtures were being used for business centre. The Ld. CIT (A) has stated that furniture and fixtures at business centre require inherently higher maintenance expenditure as business centres are used by a large number of people for commercial purposes resulting in higher wear-andtear of the furniture etc. The Ld. CIT (A) has further stated that the assessee itself had capitalized a sum of Rs. 28 lakhs approximately on account of new furni ture and f ixture. The learned Depar tmental Representative has also not disputed the observation of Ld. CIT (A) that in preceding years i.e., Assessment Years 2005- 06 and 2006-07, similar disallowances were made by Assessing Officer and were deleted by the first ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the own case of the assessee for A.Y. 2007-08 vide ITA No.623 of 2012 wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has upheld the order of the Tribunal for A.Y. 2007-08. Thus, the finding of the Tribunal that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for maintaining furniture, fixtures etc. for running the business centre were Revenue in nature and thus allowable has been upheld by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. Thus, the issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the own case of the assessee. Thus, the claim of the expenditure by the assessee on this issue for A.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2010-11 is accordingly allowed. 7. The second issue taken by the Revenue for A.Y. 2005-06 is in relation to the disallowance ....