The Commissioner Of Income Taxcoimbatore v. Shri.m.krishnan137 D.b.roadr.s.puramcoimbatore 2
High Court
15 Jun 2016 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Taxcoimbatore v. Shri.m.krishnan137 D.b.roadr.s.puramcoimbatore 2
Date of order
15 Jun 2016
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Taxcoimbatore v. Shri.m.krishnan137 D.b.roadr.s.puramcoimbatore 2, the High Court (2016) decided the matter.
Issue: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payment of Rs.14.25 lakhs for vacating the premises taken on lease is revenue expenditure, even though the compensation paid by the assessee for getting the premises vacated was ca...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 15/6/2016
C O R A M
The Honourable Mr.Justice S.Manikumarand
The Honourable Mr.Justice D.Krishnakumar
Tax Case Appeal No.1910 of 2008
The Commissioner of Income TaxCoimbatore.
...Appellant
Vs
Shri.M.Krishnan137 D.B.RoadR.S.puramCoimbatore 2....Respondent
Prayer:Appeal filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'D' Bench, Chennai dated 9/5/2008 in ITA No.2781/Mds/2005.
For appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax.
For respondent : No appearance- - - - - -
J U D G M E N T
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.Manikumar,J)
This Appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, 'D' Bench, Madras, dated 9/5/2008.
2. The substantial questions of law raised in the instant appeal are:-
“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Tribunal was right in law in holding that the payment of Rs.14.25 lakhs for vacating the premises taken on lease is revenue expenditure, even though the compensation paid by the assessee for getting the premises vacated was capital expenditure?
2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the interest on loan taken from the Bank
for purchase of shares to the tune of
Rs.8,32,950/- is allowable as Revenue
Expenditure is valid?”
3. Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax submitted that the tax implication in the instant appeal is less than the ceiling limit fixed by the Circular bearing No.21 of 2015, dated 10/12/2015. He further submitted that as per the Circular, Tax Case Appeals have been instructed to be withdrawn, subject to the matters covered under the circular.
4. Placing on record the above submissions, while dismissing
the Tax Case Appeal No.1910 of 2008, as withdrawn, substantial questions of law raised are left open. No costs.
mvs.
(S.M.K.,J) (D.K.K.,J) 15[th] June 2016.
S.MANIKUMAR,J
4
a n d
D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J
mvs.
Tax Case Appeal No.1910 of 2008
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue