DY. COMMNR., INCOME TAX, COCHIN vs. M/S. S.T.N. TEXTILE LTD

C.A. No.-004101-004101 - 2003Supreme Court25 October 20053 pages
For Petitioner: B. V. BALARAM DASFor Respondent: RR-EX-PARTE
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The High Court set aside the Tribunal's finding that the expenditure was for current repairs, answering the first question in favour of the revenue. It remitted the second question (capital expenditure) and the issue of Section 37 applicability to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a textile company, claimed a deduction for expenditure incurred on replacing an electric control panel. The Assessing Officer treated it as capital expenditure, while the Appellate Commissioner and Tribunal considered it revenue expenditure for current repairs.

What were the issues?

Whether the expenditure on replacing an electric control panel constitutes 'current repairs' deductible under Section 31, or capital expenditure, or alternatively, allowable under Section 37.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 31,Section 37

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 4101 of 2003 PETITIONER: DY.COMMNR.OF INCOME TAX,COCHIN RESPONDENT: M/S.S.T.N.TEXTILE LTD. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25/10/2005 BENCH: B.P.SINGH , S.B.SINHA & P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgement and order of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in I.T.A. 20 of 1999 dated March 14, 2002. By its aforesaid judgment and order dated 11th March, 2002 read with revised order dated 14th March, 2002, impugned herein, out of the two questions referred to the High Court for its opinion, it answered the first question in favour of the revenue, and directed that the second question, together with the question as to whether the claim of deduction of the amount could be claimed under Section 37 of the Act, be considered by the Tribunal. It accordingly, remitted the matter to the Tribunal for fresh disposal of the matter on the aforesaid two questions.

The facts of the case may be briefly noticed :- The S.T.N. (Respondent herein) is a company running a textile mill. We are concerned with the assessment year 199

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 31

All 329 judgments and leading authorities on Section 31 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →