TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 59
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the business of Civil Construction Contracts. Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y 2011-12 declaring total income of Rs. 'Nil'. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter, the assessment was framed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 28.02.2014 and the total income was determined at Rs. 92,80,400/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 23.05.2016 in Appeal No. 03/CIT(A)-7/Del/14-15 granted partial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now before us and has raised the following grounds: "1. That the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. AO/CIT(A)-VII has erred in law, in making an addition of Rs. 13,65,851/- to the returned income as disall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct to the balance expenses of Rs. 13,56,645/-, he held it to be of capital in nature and accordingly upheld its disallowance. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now before us. 6. Before us, Ld AR pointed to the expenses which have been disallowed by CIT(A) as noted in the order of CIT(A). He fairly submitted that he does not dispute the disallowance of Rs. 37,000/- on account of penalty and to that extent the disallowance be confirmed. However with respect to disallowance of Rs. 8,67,245/- paid to Larsen & Toubro Ltd., he submitted that it is towards the comprehensive repairs of machinery. He pointed to the copy of the invoice placed in the paper book and from that he pointed out that it is for the purpose of repairs and that no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4,52,400) is concerned, from the details of the bills placed in the paper book, it is seen that the bills for the expenses indicate it to be for the repairs, supply of consumables, recalibration of the machinery. It is not the case of the Revenue that by incurring of the impugned expenditure any new asset has come into existence. Considering the totality of the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that the repairs was for preserving and maintaining an already existing asset. We therefore set aside the addition confirmed by CIT(A) and hold the expense to be of revenue in nature. Thus the ground of the assessee is partly allowed 10. Second ground is with respect to disallowance of Rs. 30,92,818/- on account of non-deduction of TDS. 11. AO n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now before us. 12. Before us, Ld AR reiterated the submissions made before lower authorities and further submitted that assessee had entered into a joint venture agreement with Harish Chandra India Ltd (HCIL) known as HCIL & PEPL JV. The JV was assigned a contract by Bihar Government for improvement of existing road in Siwan Dist. As per the MOU, both the parties of the JV were to jointly open an account in the name of JV with two signatories, one from each party. It was further agreed between the partners of the JV that on receipt of payment from client, JV account will pay 3% to HCIL and 97% to assessee. The MOU also spelt out the role and obligation of both the parties. Further, as per the ....