1.   ITA 165/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs  M/S DELHI PRESS SAMACHAR PATRA (P) LTD - Delhi High Court Repairs Business Expense: Current in Nature not CAPEX: DELHI Press Samachar Case:

  

Held:

 

“We find that the Tribunal has adequately and in great detail dealt with the entire issue…

The assessee incurred a sum of Rs 35,51,245/- in the year in question on the following works:-

“(i) Water proofing of roofs with stones. (ii) Reinforcement of old beams in which steel bars and plasters were corroded. (iii) Relaying of worn out flooring of print shop/ process rooms etc. (iv) Repairing and relaying / carpeting of roads running inside the press compound. (v) Repairing and replacement of workers wash rooms, hand wash areas, damaged glass, wood work. (vi) Repairing and relaying boundary walls and gates. (vii) Repairing and reconstructions of cooling towers area. (viii) Repairing of cement sheets and laying of fiber coated sheets to prevent seepage, water and air. (ix) Repairing of AC Chiller rooms and plants…

The Tribunal also noticed that the contention of the assessee that it had undertaken major repairs to put the dilapidated columns, beams, roofs etc. in its original position, which had become dangerous and unsafe for the workmen and hindered the normal operation of the business, was not controverted by the departmental representative nor had any evidence to the contrary been produced before the Tribunal or the authorities below. It was ultimately concluded that employing the test indicated in Saravana Spinning Mills (supra), the assessee had incurred the said expenditure only to preserve and maintain the existing asset and that the expenditure was not of a nature which brought into being a new asset or created a new advantage of an enduring nature. Consequently, the Tribunal deleted the disallowance.

 

We find no reason to interfere with these findings which are essentially in the nature of factual findings”.

(Click here for judgment)

  

2.   ITA 628/2009 M/S JAY BHARAT MARUTI LTD. versus – COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - Delhi High Court

Jai Bharat maruti Case: Travelling Expense etc:

 

Held:

 

“The second aspect of the matter is with regard to travelling expenses, which have been incurred by the assessee in connection with the purchase of some plant and machinery. The Assessing Officer had claimed these expenses on the revenue account. However, the Assessing Officer treated the same as ‘capital expenditure’ and disallowed the same. This was upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal held the said expenditure to be directly connected with the purchase of the plant and machinery and, therefore, the same was to be treated as capital expenditure. We see no reason to interfere with this finding.”

(Click here for judgment) 

 

  

What's New 

a.  Procedural Aspects and Documentation on EES & CLSS Schemes  (Click for detail) 

b.  TDS Ready Reckoner as per latest changes dt.31.5.2010  (Click for detail) 

c.  Securities transaction tax abolition, rate revision on the table  (Click for detail)

d.  HRA not a right but a compensatory allowance: HC  (Click for detail)

e.  After receipt of return in response to notice under Section 148, it shall be mandatory for AO to serve a notice on assessee under section 143(2) assigning reason therein  (Click for detail)

f.  Making a wrong claim is not at par with concealment or giving of inaccurate information, which may call for levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c)  (Click for detail)

 

"When truth is divided, errors multiply…" 

Thanks for your valuable time 

"Voice of CA" 

    CA. Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, Founder - Voice of CA
Member  Central Council - ICAI
Former Chairman - NIRC
Mob : 9811080342, agarwal.s.ca@gmail.com 
   
   
CA. Kapil Goel, Moderator-Direct Taxes
Mob:9910272806, cakapilgoel@gmail.com 
 
CA. Sidharth Jain, Co-Moderator
sidhjasso@yahoo.com 
  
CA. Mukesh K Bansal, Co-Moderator-FEMA
Mob:9540022533, mukbansal80@gmail.com