Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 1989 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1989 (3) TMI 40 - HC - Income Tax

Issues:
1. Deductibility of sums paid for purchase of loom hours as capital expenditure
2. Taxability of sale of loom hours as capital gains
3. Classification of capital gains as short-term or long-term
4. Admissibility of brokerage expenditure as revenue expenditure for the sale of loom hours

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The Tribunal referred whether sums paid for purchasing loom hours constituted capital expenditure and were not deductible under section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The High Court, relying on the principle established in Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1, determined that the purchase of loom hours did not create a new asset or add to the fixed capital of the appellant. The expenditure for purchasing loom hours was considered revenue in nature and allowable as a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Therefore, the court answered this question in the negative and in favor of the assessee.

Issue 2:
Regarding the taxability of the sale of loom hours as capital gains, the court held that the money received from the sale of loom hours would be considered a revenue receipt and not capital gain. The receipt was deemed taxable as income from business, leading to a ruling in favor of the Department on this issue.

Issue 3:
As the answers to questions 1 and 2 were established, the court determined that the question of classifying the capital gains as short-term or long-term did not arise and did not require an answer.

Issue 4:
The court addressed the admissibility of brokerage expenditure incurred by the assessee for the sale of loom hours. The expenditure of Rs. 2,314 and Rs. 4,246 for brokerage in the relevant accounting periods was considered admissible as a revenue expenditure. It was emphasized that the sale of loom hours did not represent the sale of a capital asset to the purchaser, leading to a ruling in favor of the assessee on this matter.

The judgment concluded with both judges concurring on the decisions reached, providing a comprehensive resolution to the various issues raised during the assessment years 1958-59 to 1964-65.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates