1989 (3) TMI 63 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation of section 40A(8) of the Income-tax Act regarding treatment of amounts received from directors and shareholders of a private limited company.
2. Determination of whether the subsidy received from the Government should be deducted from the cost of assets for depreciation calculation under sections 43(1) and 43(6) of the Income-tax Act.

Interpretation of section 40A(8) of the Income-tax Act:
The Income-tax Officer disallowed 15% of interest paid by the assessee to certain parties, considering the principal amounts as deposits u/s 40A(8). However, the Tribunal ruled that the interest was paid to directors and shareholders on their current account, not as deposits, hence disallowance was not justified u/s 40A(8). The High Court agreed with the Tribunal's decision, stating that interest was not paid in respect of any deposit, thus disallowance was not warranted u/s 40A(8).

Treatment of Subsidy for Depreciation Calculation:
The Income-tax Officer reduced the capital subsidy received by the assessee from the cost of fixed assets for depreciation calculation u/s 43(1). The Tribunal disagreed, holding that the subsidy should not reduce the cost of assets for depreciation purposes. The High Court, based on precedent, supported the Tribunal's decision, citing that the capital subsidy was not deductible in computing the actual cost of the asset for depreciation calculation u/s 43(1) and 43(6).

Costs:
The High Court ruled that each party should bear their own costs in this reference.