1985 (4) TMI 39

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....em of the expenditure was sum of Rs. 3,000 incurred on account of payment to the lawyers. The assessee at the time of assessment asserted that this expenditure was revenue in nature and, therefore, he was entitled to deduction of this amount. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim of the assessee, holding that the expenditure incurred on account of the shifting of the head office from Jamshedpur to Calcutta was expenditure of capital nature. The assessee-opposite party filed appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The contention of the assessee found favour with the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. According to him, the expenditure was revenue in nature and not capital in nature. He, therefore, allowed the appeal holding that....

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 shifting of the factory produced an enduring advantage in the shape of transfer to a better factory site, an advantage which enabled the trade to prosper and an advantage that could be expected to last for ever. This verdict was given by the Supreme Court following the decisions in Atherton v. British Insulated and Helsby Cables Ltd. [1925] 10 TC 155 (HL) and Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1955] 27 ITR 34 (SC). Let us see how the facts stand in the instant case. The reasons for shifting the registered office of the company are to be found in the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The reasons were that the petitioner was a subsidiary company to the holding company, M/s. Indian Steel and Wire Products. The regist....