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

TMI Blog

Home

2003 (9) TMI 308

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeals have been directed by the assessee as well as by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A) dt. 8th June, 1999 pertaining to the asst. yr. 1995-96. For the sake of convenience, we will first take up the appeal directed by the assessee. 2. Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 (a), (b) and (c) have not been pressed, hence the same are dismissed. 3. Ground Nos. 2(a) and 2(b) have not been pressed since the dispute has been resolved in the subsequent year. This ground of appeal is accordingly, dismissed. 4. In ground No. 3, the assessee has challenged the order of the CIT(A) in not allowing the deduction of Rs. 4,28,571 being 1/7th of the premium payable on redemption of debentures issued in earlier years. 5. We find that this issue has been decide .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a different case. We, therefore, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore it back to the file of the AO to decide the issue in accordance with the finding given by the Special Bench on this issue. For statistical purposes this ground of appeal is allowed. 8. Grounds of appeal Nos. 5(a) and 5(b) have been decided by the Tribunal against the assessee. Respectfully following the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Eicher Tractors Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2002) 77 TTJ (Del)(SB) 681 : (2003) 84 ITD 49 (Del)(SB) we hold that the CIT(A) has rightly upheld the addition made by the AO. The ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed. 9. Ground No. 6 relating to the claim of Rs. 26,292 being income from AOP has not be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ), Enpro India Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2000) 113 Taxman 132 (Del)(Mag) and Dy. CIT vs. Patel Filters Ltd. (1993) 71 Taxman 179 (Ahd)(Mag). On the other hand the learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the CIT(A). 13. We have considered the rival submissions. As mentioned earlier the assessee incurred certain expenses on power project which was aborted. Normally, such expenditure could have been in the nature of capital expenditure but for assessee being already in the same business. As the assessee was already in the same business, the expenditure incurred on a power project which was aborted will be in the nature of revenue expenditure. Various Courts in the cases referred earlier had taken this view. Respectfully following th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ently following the direct cost method for valuation of stocks. The addition in the valuation of closing stock was made accordingly. On appeal the CIT(A) directed the AO to follow Tribunal order dt. 21st Sept., 1998 for asst. yrs. 1987-88 and 1988-89. The finding of the CIT(A) had been challenged before us. We have heard the rival submissions. In the grounds of appeal itself the Revenue has challenged the direction of the CIT(A) to value the closing stock of finished goods in accordance with the order of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for the asst. yrs. 1987-88 and 1988-89. As the CIT(A) had directed to follow the order of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case no infirmity could be found out from the order of the CIT(A). Upholding th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... income, we find that this income included the following items: (i) Old store sales (ii) Misc. sales (iii) Bardana sales (iv) Profit on sale of dyes (v) Cash discount received (vi) Other misc. incomes 25. As regards the income mentioned in (a) and (b) and (c) above, the issue was considered by the Tribunal in the earlier years and was decided in favour of the assessee. As no new facts have been brought on record, concurring with the order of the Tribunal the findings of the CIT(A) are upheld. 26. As regards income mentioned at (d) above the issue was considered by the Tribunal in the earlier year and decided against the assessee. Concurrent with the same we reverse the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue and restore the finding of the AO. 27 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates