2019 (7) TMI 750 - HC - Income Tax

Allowability of advance given for R D equipment u/s 35(1)(iv) - Allowability of replacement of dies and moulds as current repairs - entitled to deduction of entry tax paid u/s 43B which was set off against sales tax paid - HELD THAT - The assessee s own case for the assessment year 2003-04 2014 (2) TMI 522 - MADRAS HIGH COURT three substantial questions of law raised in this appeal were considered and they were decided against the revenue and in favour of the assessee It was held that Tribunal was rightly applied the decision reported in CIT Vs. Rane Brake Linings Ltd. 2001 (12) TMI 44 - MADRAS HIGH COURT while allowing the expenditure on Research Development after analysing the facts of assessee. Further when the dies and moulds were attached to the machine to manufacture the designed product the claim would fall for consideration only u/s 31 as revenue expenses. It also held that payment of entry tax has been made by the assesssee; the entry tax paid would get the adjustment as against the Sales Tax liability consequently any deduction would amount to total deduction. - the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
1. Allowance of expenditure related to advance given for R&D equipment under Section 35(1)(iv) of the Income Tax Act.
2. Allowance of expenditure on replacement of dies and moulds as current repairs.
3. Entitlement to deduction of entry tax paid under Section 43B without verifying if it had been set off against sales tax paid.

Issue 1:
The appeal by the Revenue under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 challenges the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras regarding the allowance of expenditure related to advance given for R&D equipment under Section 35(1)(iv) of the Act. The Tribunal relied on the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Rane Brake Linings Ltd. to allow the expenditure. The High Court, following precedent, rejected the Revenue's plea, upholding the Tribunal's decision.

Issue 2:
Regarding the allowance of expenditure on replacement of dies and moulds as current repairs, the Tribunal held that such expenditure was revenue in nature. The Tribunal considered the replacement of dies and moulds as qualifying for current repairs under Section 31 of the Act, emphasizing that they were not in the nature of installation of machinery in the factory. The High Court referred to various decisions, including the Karnataka High Court case of Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe Pvt. Ltd., and the decision in the case of Super Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. The High Court, applying the principles from these cases, upheld the Tribunal's decision, modifying the order to consider the claim as current repairs falling under Section 31 of the Act.

Issue 3:
The Tribunal also considered the entitlement to deduction of entry tax paid under Section 43B without verifying if it had been set off against sales tax paid. The High Court, following the Tribunal's decision, held that the entry tax payment made by the assessee was allowable for deduction. The Court noted that the payment of entry tax had been made by the assessee, and any deduction would amount to a total deduction, as the entry tax paid would get adjusted against the Sales Tax liability. Therefore, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, answering the Substantial Questions of law in favor of the respondent/assessee.

In conclusion, the High Court of Madras, in the judgment delivered by Mr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Mrs. Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan, addressed and resolved the issues raised by the Revenue in the appeal under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decisions regarding the allowance of expenditure related to R&D equipment, replacement of dies and moulds as current repairs, and the deduction of entry tax paid. The High Court's analysis was based on precedent cases and legal principles, ultimately dismissing the appeal and ruling in favor of the respondent/assessee.