Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 905 - HC - Income TaxNature of expenses - expenditure incurred on capital stores and spares - Revenue or capital expenditure - HELD THAT:- Tribunal has considered all the materials available on record and thereby dismissed the appeal of the revenue it has been observed by the Tribunal that the replacement of spares in the machineries would be allowable as Revenue expenditure only and addition made by the Assessing Officer was erroneous and hence, the same was deleted. The Tribunal has also observed that the expenditure incurred by the assessee cannot be treated as capital expenditure but it can be treated as revenue expenditure only. Addition u/s 14A - Whether no expenditure has been incurred to earn the exempt income disclosed during the year under consideration? - HELD THAT:- The same are already covered by the decision of Gujarat Industries Power Company Ltd [2022 (8) TMI 1409 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - The aforesaid two substantial questions of law are similar to that of those which were proposed to be framed in the case of Gujarat Industries (supra). Similar substantial questions of law have been proposed in the present appeal. Addition (net of depreciation) being expenses incurred on software treating the same as revenue expenditure - Whether the expenses are for new or different advantage of enduring nature and so to be treated as capital expenditure eligible for depreciation @ 25%? - HELD THAT:- This issue is also no more res-integra based on the observation made in the decision of N.J. India Invest (P) Ltd. [2013 (7) TMI 738 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. In the present case, Tribunal has specifically observed that the expenditure was incurred only for facilitating the trading operation leaving the fixes untouched. Assessing Officer disallowed the above expenditure and treated as capital expenditure being enduring the nature. Tribunal has reversed the finding of Assessing Officer and CIT (Appeals) in view of the observation made in N.J. India correctly. We are not incline to admit the present appeal, as the proposed substantial questions of law are not substantial questions of law.
|