TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... averi, J. 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. 2. This court while admitting the appeal on December 8, 2008 has framed the following substantial questions of law : 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal committed serious illegality and error of judgment in holding that the interest paid on the borrowings utilized for setting up a new unit of cement plant constituted revenue expenditure ignoring the fact and that the plant had not yet commenced production ? 2. Whether the findings of the Tribunal are perverse in upholding the order of the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome has added the guest house expenses under section 37(4) only at ₹ 2,53,055. On this question, it was stated by the assessee that the repairs and rent of the guest house properties are not covered under section 37(4) in view of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Chase Bright Steel Ltd. (No. 2) [1989] 177 ITR 128 (Bom) and also the judgment of Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in assessee's own case. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Jaipur in R. A. No.8-9/JP/96 dated February 24, 1997 has rejected the reference application of the Department filed for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1992-93 on this issue relying on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Mangal Chand Tubes Pvt. Ltd. v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring the year relevant to the assessment year 1997-98, the assessee has claimed expenditure of ₹ 2,82,693 (revised to ₹ 3,41,240). On examination, it was noticed that the expenditure was booked by the assessee during the financial year 1997-98 relevant to the assessment year 1998-99. Since the assessee failed to prove that the expenditure was allowable during the financial year 1996-97 relevant to the assessment year 1997-98 and the liability had actually crystallised during the period relevant to the assessment year 1998-99. The same cannot be allowed and accordingly the claim of ₹ 3,41,240 is disallowed. The assessee has claimed deduction of ₹ 2,04,16,092 under section 43B in respect of interest paid to public fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal committed serious illegality and error of judgment in holding that the interest paid on the borrowings utilised for setting up a new unit of cement plant constituted revenue expenditure ignoring the fact that the plant had not yet commenced production ?' 3. In other two appeals, the question No. 2 above is the only question. 4. The first issue is covered by the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Mangalam Cement Ltd., Kota, D. B. Income Tax Reference No. 10 of 1999 decided on October 17, 2002 [2004] 266 ITR 385 (Raj), where the issue was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Department. 5. In that view of the matter, the first issue will be gove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
