Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 797 - HC - Income TaxEntitlement for depreciation - Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that Vibro Bed Drier is an item covered Under Appendix-1/H-III/(3)(III) of the Income Tax Rule 1962 and is entitled for 100% depreciation Held that:- The instrument is a waste heat recovery equipment and is also energy economiser enabling a saving of over 40% as compared to conventional dryer the Tribunal held that the energy efficient instrument was considered to fall within the relevant entry of the schedule and therefore 100% depreciation was allowed - The question is a mixed question of fact and law - The department did not try to lead any evidence to show that the instrument in question cannot be brought within entry 3B or 3C of the schedule thus, the order of the Tribunal upheld Decided against Revenue. Valuation of Closing stock Deduction u/s 43B of the Act - Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that valuation of closing stock is to be made ignoring the amount of cess paid when the same was debited, and the net effect will be nil on deduction of the same has to be allowed from the income of next year Held that:- The decision in Berger Paints India Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income-Tax [2004 (2) TMI 4 - SUPREME Court] and Lakhanpal National Limited Versus Income-Tax Officer [1986 (3) TMI 42 - GUJARAT High Court] followed - The entire amount of excise duty/customs duty paid by the assessee in a particular accounting year was an allowable deduction in respect of that year irrespective of the amount of excise duty/customs duty which was included in the valuation of the assessees closing stock at the end of the accounting year Decided against Revenue. Deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act Export turnover - Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the export turnover should be the total of the amount brought to India and the amount paid as brokerage/commission outside India ignoring the fact that the amount paid as brokerage/commission was not made by appropriate remittances from India Held that:- The amount of commission or brokerage paid outside India was never received or brought into the country by the exported - The money spent on account of brokerage or commission was deducted from the price of the goods and the balance amount even according to the assessee was received in the country in foreign exchange thus, the view taken by the revenue is correct - Decided in favour of Revenue.
|