DCIT, Circle - 12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. International Seaports (Haldia) Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata
In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed
ITA 997/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Dec 2022AY 2012-13
Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 997/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income International Seaports (Haldia) Tax, Circle-12(1), Kolkata Vs Pvt. Ltd. 41, Jawahar Lal Nehru Road Kanak Building 3Rd Floor Kolkata - 700071 [Pan : Aaaci9468D] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sudipto Ghosh, Cit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/10/2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/12/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 4, Kolkata [Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Kolkata- 4/10691/2015-16, Vide Order Dt. 14/02/2018, Against The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-12(1), Kolkata For Assessment Year 2012-13, Dated 27/03/2015. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:- “1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred By Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee Company Stating That The Expenditure Of Rs.5,21,03,578/- Made On Account Of Repairing Work Made By The Concern M/S. Portek Systems & Equipments Pte. Ltd., Singapore Was Revenue Expenditure. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred By Not Appreciating The Facts That The Aforesaid Repairing Work Was Not Routine Repairing Works Of The Assessee Company & It Required Technical Assistance To Bring The Ship Unloaders In A Good Condition For Future Works. Ay: 2012-13 International Seaports (Haldia) Pvt. Ltd. 2
For Appellant: Shri Somnath Ghosh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sudipto Ghosh, CIT D/R
Section 143(3)Section 40
…t of commercial expediency. The test evolved in New Shorrock Spg. & Mfg. Co. Ltd.’s case (supra) is the most appropriate, one having regard to the context in which the said expression occurs. 2. Bharat Gears Ltd. vs. CIT Even if technically new asset had not (337 ITR 368) come into existence or the capacity of the overhauled machine after reconditioning was not enhanced, fact remains that after prolonged use this machinery was lying idle in a broken down condition, totally unfit for production. Therefore, by subsequent reconditioning carried out had resulted in imparting useful life to and hitherto old and unfit…
