CIT vs. PENGUIN BOOK INDIA PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 17.01.2011 . . Present: None. . +ITA No.41/2011 . . The respondent/assessee had incurred certain expenditure on a premises leased by it. They had claimed depreciation at the rate of 100% stating it to be improvement/repairs on the leasehold premises. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the expenditure is capital in nature and allowed only 10% depreciation. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has allowed the entire amount treating the same to be expenditure incurred on repairs and discussed the issue in the following manner: . . . ?7. Apropos the other issue i.e. disallowance of expenditure on repairs and renovations. Brief facts are assessee was carrying out its business activities from 10th and 11th Community Centre, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi using third floor along with the basement of the two buildings. During the year assessee further got lease for two premises on 3rd floor of 8th and 9th Community Centre to facilitate its business, a way was made between 8th and 9th community centre, a passage was made demolishing certain part of walls, repairs of flooring and other works to make the premises functional as per its business requirements. Assessee claimed the same as repairs and renovation. AO, however, treated the same as capital expenditure as part of building and fittings allowing depreciation @ 10%. . . . ITA No.41/2011 Page 1 of 2 . Aggrieved assessee preferred first appeal where it was contended that AO neither considered actual nature and quantum of expenses under each head and they were not capital in nature as the premises was leasehold and no new capital asset had come into existence. CIT(A), however, did not allow this claim.? . It is clear from the above that a finding of fact is arrived at by the Tribunal. No question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. . A.K. SIKRI, J. . . M.L. MEHTA, J. . JANUARY 17, 2011 DEV . ITA No.41/2011 Page 2 of 2 . . #2