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

2016 (10) TMI 1214

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ircumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in allowing depreciation on the ship when it was neither used nor intended to be used as indicated in the Director's Report, without appreciating that as per the provisions of section 32 of the Act the depreciation is allowable only when the asset is used by the assessee for the purpose of business or profession during the relevant year". 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in allowing the expenditure of Rs. 1,12,500/being fees paid to the Registrar of Company for increase in the authorized share capital of the company, without appreciating that the same was not allowable as per decision of Apex Court in the case of Br .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hich the above penalty was not allowable as deduction. 6. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the disallowance of sundry contributions of Rs. 4,87,781/made to the unrecognized entities u/s 40A(9) of the Income Tax Act, following the decision on the similar issue in A.Y. 1985-86, without appreciating that the appeal of the assessee on the issue in assessment year 1985-86 was dismissed as not pressed and that the amount of claim of the assessee was not allowable u/s 40 A(9) of the Income Tax Act." 3. Re. Question (1): (a) The impugned order of the Tribunal has allowed the Respondent Assessee's appeal on the issue of depreciation by following its order in the case of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondentassessee before it. It does not give rise to any inflow of fresh funds as the capital employed continues to remain the same. Nor is there any benefit of enduring nature received on issue of bonus shares. Therefore, the expenses incurred for issue of bonus shares are to be allowed as revenue expenditure. (c) Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue, contends that expenditure incurred for issuance of shares would be capital in nature as held by the Supreme Court in Broke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT 225 ITR 798. This case was considered by the Apex Court in General Insurance Corporation (supra) and held to be inapplicable in case of expenditure incurred for issue of bonus shares. Broke Bond (I) Ltd. (supra) was not a case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n CIT vs. Shri Ambika Mills Ltd., (1993) 201 ITR (st.) 63 which approved the view of Gujarat High Court that investment allowance on the increased amount, consequent to foreign exchange fluctuations, is allowable. (c) Similarly, the reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Arvind Mills Ltd., 193 ITR 255 is inappropriate as it was rendered in the context of devaluation of the Rupee. Moreover it was also not concerned with the issue of investment allowance. (d) In the above view, the question as framed being concluded by the decision of this Court in Associated Bearing Co. Ltd., (supra), no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. Therefore, not entertained. 6. Re. Question (4): (a) The impugned order of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ibunal has allowed the Respondent Assessee's appeal before it by following its orders on an identical issue passed in the case of the same Respondent Assessee for the same Assessment Years 1983-84, 1985-86, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. (b) Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue, states that nothing is available on record to indicate that any appeal has been filed by the Revenue in respect of the orders of the Tribunal for Assessment Years 1983-84, 1985-86, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. (c) The impugned order of the Tribunal merely follows its orders for the Assessment Years 1983-84, 1985-86, 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. Therefore, as they have been accepted by the Revenue and no distinguishing features in the su .....

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