Madras H.C : Whether the expenditure incurred in shifting the offices from Madurai to Bangalore should be regarded as capital or revenue

High Court Of Madras

CIT vs. Madura Coats Ltd.

Section 37(1)

Asst. Year 1979-80

R. Jayasimha Babu & K. Gnanaprakasam, JJ.

T.C. No. 474 of 1989

21st February, 2001

Counsel AppearedMrs. Chitra Venkataraman, for the Revenue : P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, for the Assessee

JUDGMENT

R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. :

The question is whether the expenditure incurred in shifting the offices from Madurai to Bangalore should be regarded as capital or revenue. We are rather surprised that the Revenue should at all have taken the view that it amounts to capital expenditure. It is obvious that the expenditure incurred was in relation to the continuing business of the company which was to be henceforth carried on so far as the administrative control is concerned from Bangalore instead of Madurai. The fact that it was done after amalgamation cannot be regarded as rendering it capital expenditure, as no enduring advantage can be said to have been received. Mere improvement in convenience, and increase in efficiency does not mean a permanent advantage which has to be regarded as falling within the capital field. We, therefore, answer the question referred to us for the asst. yr. 1980, as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 2,36,353 incurred by the assessee for shifting its administrative office from Madurai to Bangalore as a result of amalgamation of three companies having a number of activities in various centres was allowable as a revenue expenditure in the computation of business income in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The assessee shall be entitled to costs in a sum of Rs. 1,500.

[Citation : 253 ITR 62]

Malcare WordPress Security