TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 348
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Rs. 13,32,903/- after allowing Rs. 1,48,100/- being 10% as depreciation an amount treated as capitalized. The appellant prays that the addition made is arbitrary and without appreciating correct nature of expenses and therefore be deleted. 2. The learned CIT(A) has also erred in making disallowance of Rs. 57,346/- as car expenses by treating them as personal. 3. The learned CIT(A) also erred in making disallowance of Rs. 179631/- out of sundry balance written off which are not recoverable by the appellant company." 3. At the outset learned counsel of the assessee submitted that she will not be pressing ground no. 2. Accordingly, this ground is dismissed as not pressed. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... denying of the fact that the furniture and fixtures installed can be removed and used by the assessee company in future. 5. The present status of the furniture and fixture has not been filed as it was submitted that at present the operation from the said premises where renovation work was carried out had been discontinued. 6. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire claim of renovation expenses i.e Rs. 14,81,003/- being capital in nature and the same was added to the total income of the assessee. However, the assessee company was allowed depreciation on the said amount at the prescribed rate of 10% which works out to Rs. 1,48,100/-. The total disallowance works out to Rs. 13,32,903/-and the same was add....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ign, Architectural Partner & Educational Partner. During the year the Appellant Company had filed return of income on 28/09/2011 declaring income at Rs. 21,74,360/-. 2. The Appellant was carrying its business from the rented premises known as "Hi-Life" in unit No.61 & 62, 34, 36, 38 at Santacruz and 205 Apple Plaza at Dadar from April, 2010. (Lease Period is only for Three Years). It was running the business as representative of US Company M/s Autodesk. During the F.Y. 2010-11 the US Company M/s Autodesk had suggested to carry out the renovation to meet their requirements & to match their standards thus it was compulsion that renovation was carried on rented premises. The entire renovation was in the nature of repairs which include....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under section 30(a)(i) as well as under section 37(1). 4. In order to make over the existing furniture & fixtures to the needs of Appellant's business, it incurred Rs. 14,81,003/- on refurnishing the same. For making over the furniture usable for its business. 5. The clause no. 7 of the agreement provides that "The party will not make any addition/alteration to the said items except for the upkeep of the same". Therefore Appellant Company is not supposed to make any renovation but they can repair, remake to upkeep the same as required for their business needs. 6. The Appellant Company had incurred expenses towards painting, false ceiling, fixing tiles, replacing glasses, wooden partitions, replacement of elect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the considered opinion that the treatment of these expenditure as capital expenditure is not at all justified. Hence, I set aside the orders of authorities below and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. 11. Apropos ground number three, the Assessing Officer has denied the expenditure claimed being bad debt written off. Upon assessee's appeal learned CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to verify the facts as under: "I have perused the assessment order and submissions made by the appellant in this regard. It is noted that there is some merit in the contention of the appellant. The assessee is entitled to write off of the balance outstanding if it was offered as income in the earlier year and the same has becom....