- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.605 OF 2008 ... Western Press Pvt.Ltd. ...Appellant v/s. The ACIT ...Respondent ... Mr.S.G.Dalal for the Appellant. Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Respondent. ... CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: 19TH SEPTEMBER, 2008 P.C.: Admit. Heard finally by consent of parties. The question of law framed by the Appellant is as - 2 - follows: Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in confirming the action of the Respondent in treating the compensation amount of Rs.9,50,000/- paid to Kalpana Art Studio as Capital expenditure as against revenue expenditure treated by the Appellant in its books of accounts? The tribunal has held that the payment made to the sub-tenant has to be treated as capital expenditure. However, in paragraph 17 of its order the tribunal has observed thus:- "....The assessee was getting rent from the said sub-tenant and right to receive rent ceased after getting the premises vacated. The income producing right got extinguished and as a direct consequence of assessee paying the compensation. As a consequence of vacating the premises, the assessee did not derive a benefit of long enduring nature." - 3 - Perusal of the above quoted paragraph from the order of the tribunal shows that the tribunal has recorded a finding contrary to the observations made in the order. In our opinion, therefore, the tribunal has to reconsider this aspect of the matter and make a fresh order. The order of the tribunal impugned in the appeal to that extent is set aside. Appeal is remitted back to the tribunal for fresh decision on the above referred aspect of the matter in accordance with law. Appeal disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)