SAURASHTA CEMENT LTD.,,PORBANDAR vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2,, JAMNAGAR

ITA 457/RJT/2014Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot05 July 2023AY 2010-11Bench: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member)14 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s deletion of several disallowances related to damages, settlement expenses, and other claims. The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee's appeal, directing that depreciation on an electricity line be treated as revenue expenditure and allowing contribution to a PWD road as a business expense.

What were the facts?

The Revenue and the assessee filed cross-appeals against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2010-11. The Revenue appealed the deletion of various disallowances made by the AO, while the assessee appealed certain disallowances confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether certain expenses claimed by the assessee were allowable business expenditures and whether disallowances made by the AO under various sections of the Income Tax Act were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 14A,Section 37(1),Section 40A(9)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Before: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, AR
For Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT (D.R.)
Hearing: 08.06.2023Pronounced: 05.07.2023

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

These cross appeals are filed by the Revenue and assessee against the order dated 23.05.2014 passed by the CIT(A), Jamnagar for the Assessment Year 2010-

11.2.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by deleting the disallowance of damages and settlement expenses of Rs.6,12,64,000/- made by the AO. A.Ys. 2010-11

2.

The Ld. CIT(A

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 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →