Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus RUKSH INTERNATIONAL

2015 (11) TMI 850 - ITAT LUCKNOW

Addition of diversion of interest bearing funds for non-business purpose - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- CIT(A) followed the judgment of the hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [2009 (1) TMI 4 - HIGH COURT BOMBAY] and the judgment of CIT v. Radico Khaitan Ltd. [2004 (9) TMI 37 - ALLAHABAD High Court] and deleted both these disallowances. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue could not controvert these findings o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

egarding chrome recovery plant also, he has given a categorical finding in para 3.7 of his order that in rule 5 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, 100 per cent. depreciation is allowable and since the plant is used for less than 180 days in the present year, it is allowable at 50 per cent. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue could not controvert these findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Hence we decline to interfere with the order of the Commissioner of Income-t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in [1972 (10) TMI 33 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court] and Cochin Company v. CIT as reported in [1967 (3) TMI 19 - SUPREME Court] where it was held that the machines which were reconditioned with substantially new parts are to be treated as new machines. CIT(Appeals) has reproduced a chart containing analysis of percentage of the cost of new parts to total cost indicating such percentage at 62.50 per cent. and 66.67 per cent. in two cases, 75.89 per cent. and 77.32 per cent. in two cases and mor .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gh Court] and on a judgment of Janta Sugar Industries v. CIT as reported in [2005 (2) TMI 12 - HIGH COURT, ALLAHABAD ] where it was held that for claiming depreciation and investment allowance, material date is the date of installation and not the date of acquisition. The disallowance was made by the Assessing Officer on this basis that the drums of ₹ 8,98,835 and paddles of ₹ 2,94,438 were purchased at the end of the financial year 2004-05 but installed in the financial year 2005-06 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d by 1. A. K. Garodia (Accountant Member).-This is the Revenue's appeal directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax-II Kanpur dated March 22, 2013 for the assessment year 2006-07. 2. Ground No. 1 is as under : "That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Kanpur has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,49,804 made by the Assessing Officer on account of diversion of interest bearing funds for non-business purposes without a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssment proceedings." 4. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue supported the assessment order and the learned authorised representative for the assessee supported the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 5. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has given a categorical finding in para 2 of his order that unsecured loan given to M/s. REP International were fully covered by the interest-fre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

354 (All) and deleted both these disallowances. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue could not controvert these findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Hence we decline to interfere with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both these grounds are rejected. 6. Ground No. 3 is as under : "That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Kanpur has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,87,720 made by the Ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessee itself in its return of income without appreciating the facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceed ings." 8. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue supported the assessment order and the learned authorised representative for the assessee supported the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 9. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has gi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ce the plant is used for less than 180 days in the present year, it is allowable at 50 per cent. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue could not controvert these findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Hence we decline to interfere with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on these issues also because even if a claim was not made in the return of income, it can be made before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) if it is a legal claim .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings." 11. The learned Departmental representative for the Revenue supported the assessment order and the learned authorised representative for the assessee supported the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 12. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has relied upon a judgment of the hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

h percentage at 62.50 per cent. and 66.67 per cent. in two cases, 75.89 per cent. and 77.32 per cent. in two cases and more than 87 per cent. in remaining three cases. Hence under these facts, the decision of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is in line with these judgments followed by him. No contrary judgment is cited by the learned Departmental representative for the Revenue. Hence we decline to interfere with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pported the assessment order and the learned authorised representative for the assessee supported the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 15. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has relied upon a judgment of the hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court rendered in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Milk Food Manufacturers Ltd. as reported in [1974] 96 ITR 278 (P&H) and by the hon'ble apex court rendered .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(Appeals). Hence we decline to interfere in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue also. This ground is also rejected. 16. Ground No. 7 is as under : "That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Kanpur has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 80,494 made by the Assessing Officer on account of additional depreciation on drum and paddle, ₹ 80,494 without appreciating the facts brought on record by the Assessing Officer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version