Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2007 (1) TMI 146 - HC - Income TaxDeduction of expenses related to obtaining fixed deposits from the public - Allowed as Revenue Or Capital Expenditure - Depreciation on stand by spare parts even though they were not taken for use during the year - HELD THAT - Undisputedly as found in the order of the Appellate Tribunal the stand-by items are assets acquired by the assessee and kept in readiness for use whenever the machinery that is regularly used goes out of action or requires repairs. In CIT v. Vayithri Plantations Ltd. 1980 (1) TMI 27 - MADRAS HIGH COURT which arose out of an almost similar set of facts seeking grant of development rebate. In that case the assessee company completed the construction of building and the installation of machinery before March 31 1971 but could not start regular manufacture with the aid of that machinery because of frequent labour unrest and the assessee claimed development rebate in respect of the machinery but the Assessing Officer rejected the claim on the ground that the machinery in respect of which the claim had been made had only been installed and had not been used in the year of account and hence the amount would be allowed as a deduction in the next year when the machinery was actually brought into use. However the Commissioner as well as the Tribunal directed the grant of allowance. Applying the ratio as laid down above to the facts of the case we are of the view that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on spare parts which are stand-by items even though they were not taken for use during the accounting year. Accordingly the first question of law is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. Fixed deposits from the public - We are of the view that when the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the expenses relating to obtaining fixed deposits are closely linked with the business requirement of the assessee such expenses are allowable expenses. We therefore hold that the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenses for obtaining fixed deposits from the public is revenue in nature. Accordingly we answer the second question in the affirmative and against the Revenue. In fine both the questions are answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. The appeal stands dismissed.
|