TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (6) TMI 73
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....relation to the appellant for the assessment year 2009-10. 2. By the said order, the Appellate Tribunal had affirmed the order of the Assessing Authority as also the First Appellate Authority that disallowed a claim for an amount of Rs. 101.87 lakhs as revenue expenditure since, according to the Assessing Authority and the First Appellate Authority, the expenditure that was incurred by the appellant/assessee by way of addition to buildings and electrical fittings on leasehold premises was in the nature of capital expenditure and not revenue expenditure. In the appeals before us, the appellant raises the following questions of law: "a) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case the Tribunal is justified in confirming the disall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of the claim for revenue expenditure: 6. Disallowance of Current Repairs 6.1 The assessee claimed an amount of Rs. 101.87 lakhs as revenue expenditure which is addition to building and electrical fittings on leasehold premises. The Ld. AO, invoking Explanation-1 to Sec. 32 (1) held that capital expenditure incurred on a leased building was to be capitalized and depreciation would be allowed. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 101.87 lakhs was disallowed. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same but directed the LD. AO to allow depreciation on capital component of expenditure. Aggrieved the assesee is in further appeal before us. 6.2. From the facts, it emerges that the assessee has incurred expenditure on existing building which is erected on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tribunal has mechanically applied the provisions of Explanation -1 to Section 32 (1) of the IT Act to the case of the assessment and further, it does not specifically refer to the aforementioned decision of the Full Bench of this Court. He therefore prays for a remand of the case to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration of the issue. 6. Per Contra, Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department would point out that by the impugned order, the Tribunal has merely affirmed the orders of the Assessing Authority and the First Appellate Authority. The orders of the Assessing Authority and the First Appellate Authority clearly discuss the claim made by the assessee and find that, based on the description of the exp....