Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 584 - AT - Income TaxAddition made on account of expenditure incurred on repairs and maintenance treating the same as capital expenditure - Held that:- in the present case simply because there was massive repairs and substantial expenditure incurred by assessee on repairs the same cannot be treated as capital in nature for the reason that there was no expansion of the coke ovens but the number of ovens remained the same at 46 as in 1989. No new coke ovens were add-up by incurring the expenditure and moreover there was no vacant space in the factory to set up additional coke ovens. The expenditure was incurred only on fire bricks, fire clay and tiles and no expenditure on steel and other materials were required for construction of new coke ovens as is evident from bills and vouchers. Secondly, repairing was done from outer side of the ovens and the platform from where the heated coal is dragged out after production. This repair necessitated due to use of high V.M. and low ash contents of imported coal, which resulted in increase in temperature, repair had to be done by using good quality of fire bricks to safeguard the ovens from melting, bending and other damages. In view of these facts, we consider the repairs carried out by the assessee as revenue in nature and we confirm the order of CIT(A) on this issue. - Decided in favour of assessee Disallowance made by AO u/s. 35D - Held that:- We find that the assessee has claimed deduction of expenditure at one-fifth u/s. 35D of the Act in respect of expenditure of ₹ 75,000/- incurred in FY 2001-02 relevant to AY 2002-03 and subsequent years the same has all along been allowed being one-fifth as per the provisions of section 35D of the Act. We find no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in allowing this claim of assessee. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS on the expenses of security guard and import expenses as well as interest on loan - Held that:- We find from the order of the CIT(A) that the assessee has made payments of TDS and these payments are made within the due date of filing of return of income by the assessee as is evidenced from the details given before the CIT(A). We find that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v Virgin Creations [2011 (11) TMI 348 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee
|