1999 (9) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the litigation expenditure is capital expenditure even when the expenditure incurred was in connection with an acquisition of a business asset, demanding a specific performance of the contract '?" The assessee is a firm carrying on trade in Bangalore. It had entered into contract with a trust to purchase a property but the trust did not convey the property. The assessee instituted a suit during the previous year, and expended a sum of Rs. 60,000 which it claimed in the revenue field. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the sum of Rs. 60,000 which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. The Revenue thereupon went in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the order of the deletion. The Revenue contended before t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....c performance had to be filed. The expenditure so incurred was in connection with the business and therefore is allowable in the revenue field. It is further contended that the expenditure is incapable of being capitalised in the event the assessee should lose the litigation or, for that matter, in a future year since the expenditure had been made in this year. The case of Dalmia Jain and Co. Ltd. [1971] 81 ITR 754 (SC), was relied on for the following proposition : "Where litigation expenses are incurred by the assessee for the purpose of creating, curing or completing the assessee's title to the capital, then the expenses incurred must be considered as capital expenditure. But if the litigation expenses are incurred to protect the busine....