Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (2) TMI 1366

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vehicles, and books are considered as plant. If that be so, electrical installation is definitely part of a plant. In our opinion, ld. CIT(Appeals) was justified in allowing this claim of assessee. Decided against revenue Belated payments of Employees’ contribution to Provident Fund and ESI - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT -vs.-Vijay Shree Ltd. [2011 (9) TMI 30 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] had held that amendment to second proviso to section 43B of the Act, as introduced by Finance Act, 2003 was curative and retrospectively applied from 1st April, 1988, relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT -vs.- Alom Extrusions Limited [2009 (11) TMI 27 - SUPREME COURT] . Their Lo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... D.R, for the Department. Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan, Advocate, for the assessee. CORRIGENDUM ORDER Abraham P. Geroge : 1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, directed against an order dated 30.03.2012 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Kolkata, it has stressed five grounds, of which ground no. 5 is general, needs no adjudication. 2. Vide its Grounds 1 & 2, Revenue assails the deletion of an addition of ₹ 5,45,980/- made by the Assessing Officer for a claim of additional depreciation on plant & machinery. 3. Facts apropos are that assessee, a manufacturer of jute and paper related goods, had during the relevant previous year claimed additional depreciation on plant & machinery newly installed by it, which, inte .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... engaged in the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing [or in the business of generation or generation and distribution of power], further sum equal to twenty per cent of the actual cost of such machinery or plant shall be allowed as deduction under clause (ii): Provided that no deduction shall be allowed in respect of - (A) Any machinery or plant which, before its installation by the assessee, was used either within or outside India by any other person; or (B) Any machinery or plant installed in any office premises or any residential accommodation, including accommodation in the nature of a guest-house; or (C) Any office appliances or road transport vehicles; or (D) Any machinery or plant, the whole of the actual cost .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... due date prescribed under Provident Fund Act and Rules were also deductible if the amounts were remitted prior to the due date of filing of the return. 9. We find that the aforesaid issue is covered by the decision of Hon ble jurisdictional High Court. There is no dispute that the payments were affected by the assessee before the due date of filing the return. Ground No. 3, therefore, stands dismissed. 10. Vide it s ground no. 4, grievance of the revenue is that interest of ₹ 19,63,017/- added by the Assessing Officer was deleted by ld. CIT(Appeals). 11. Facts apropos are that assessee had given a sum of ₹ 2.91 crores to one of its subsidiary company called Kamarthatty Power Ltd. Assessing Officer required the assessee to expla .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ly relying on the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd. - vs.- CIT [288 ITR 1] submitted that the amounts were given to the subsidiary based on commercial expediency. As per the assessee, sources of funds were explained. Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Madhab Prasad Jatia -vs.- CIT [118 ITR 200]. 14. Ld. CIT(Appeals) was appreciative of these contentions. According to him, assessee had sufficient interest-free fund available with it and Assessing Officer could not establish the nexus between borrowed fund and the amount given as advance to the subsidiary. He, therefore, deleted the addition made. 15. Now before us, ld. DR strongly assailing the order of ld. CIT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||