9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 704X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rm different functions. Therefore, when each of the department/division perform different functions, repair/ substitution of an old machine will not come within the definition of the word current repairs and deduction cannot be claimed thereunder. - Decided against assessee. - Tax Case Appeal Nos.685 And 686 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 27-6-2019 - Mr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mrs. Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan For the Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar Mrs.K.G.Usharani For the Respondent : Mr.R.Sivaraman COMMON JUDGMENT T .S.SIVAGNANAM, J. We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mrs.K.G.Usharani, le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the assessee. The relevant portions in the said decision rendered by us in the case of M/s.Kongarar Spinners Limited read as follows : 5. At this juncture, it would be beneficial to refer to the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarangpur Cotton Mfg.Co.Ltd.,(Supra): '1. The present appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated 3rd July, 2002 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Income Tax Reference No.141 of 1989. The following question of law has been raised in the appeal:- Whether the Higher Court was right in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction on account of revenue expenditure incurred on m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aggrieved, the Revenue department preferred a Reference Application before the Gujarat High Court. The high Court by the impugned order had answered the question of law raised by the appellant herein in favour of the respondent-assessee. 7. We have heard the Ms.Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the appellant-revenue department. No one has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent-assessee. 8. Learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that the view taken by the Gujarat High Court by relying on two decisions in the case of CIT Vs Baroda Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., [1992] 198 ITR 716/65 Taxman 359(Guj.) and in the case of CIT Vs. Satyadev Chemic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or any deduction under the head current repairs as claimed and allowed by the two authorities. 10. The appeal succeeds and is allowed. 11. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.' 6. We have gone through the facts in the instant case and we find it to be identical to that of the facts dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Sarangpur Cotton Mfg.Ltd. (Supra). 7. Thus, by following the said decision, these appeals are allowed and the substantial question of law is answered in favour of the Revenue. 6. Accordingly, the above tax case appeals are allowed an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
