CIT v. Grace Paper Industries (P.) Ltd.

183 ITR 591High Court1990#3456 most cited

What is CIT v. Grace Paper Industries (P.) Ltd. authority for?

A subsidy granted by the government for industrial development in backward areas is not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery and therefore cannot be deducted towards the cost of acquisition of capital assets.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Grace Paper Industries · subsidy · capital assets · cost of acquisition · backward areas · industrial development · actual cost · plant and machinery · Gujarat High Court

Also reported as

52 Taxmann 18

Sections most often in play

Section 43(1)Section 32Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 147Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 36(1)(va)Section 143(1)(a)

Issues it is cited on

section 2(24)(xviii)section 33acsection 41(1)(a)section 43(1)section 211section 143(1)(a)(ii)section 32(1)(iia)minimum alternate taxinitial assessment yearcasus omissussection 38block of assets

Judgments citing CIT v. Grace Paper Industries (P.) Ltd.

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD6(1), PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos.154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the\nassessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA\nNo

ITA 157/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…her such\nsubsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition\nof capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was\nconsidered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT\nv/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The\nCourt noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for\ndevelopment of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the\nactual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it\ncould not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The\nCourt held as under:-\n\n“We have carefully considered the provisions re…

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

ITA 156/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:- “We have carefully considered the provisions relating…

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(1), PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos.154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the\nassessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA\nNo

ITA 155/PUN/2025[2017-198]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2017-198
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…her such\nsubsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition\nof capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was\nconsidered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT\nv/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The\nCourt noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for\ndevelopment of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the\nactual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it\ncould not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The\nCourt held as under:-\n\"We have carefully considered the provisions rel…

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD,PUNE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

ITA 154/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:- “We have carefully considered the provisions relating…

SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

ITA 1423/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:- “We have carefully considered the provisions relating…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-5, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PVT. LTD., PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

ITA 114/PUN/2025[2020]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:- “We have carefully considered the provisions relating…

ACIT, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos. 154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA

ITA 1844/PUN/2024[2019]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.154 To 156/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 To 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:- “We have carefully considered the provisions relating…

ACIT, PUNE vs. SHRINIWAS ENGINEERING AUTO COMPONENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, ITA Nos.154 to 156/PUN/2025 filed by the\nassessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes, ITA\nNo

ITA 1843/PUN/2024[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Dec 2025
Section 2(24)(xviii)Section 43

…her such\nsubsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition\nof capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was\nconsidered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT\nv/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd., reported in 183 ITR 591. The\nCourt noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for\ndevelopment of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the\nactual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it\ncould not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The\nCourt held as under:-\n“We have carefully considered the provisions rela…

M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(1),, BARODA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 784/AHD/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…ring plant and machinery but was instead linked to post-commencement operations, the same should not be reduced from the cost of fixed assets. 4.4. The AR also referred to the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s decision in CIT vs. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd. [183 ITR 591] and CIT vs. Swastik Sanitary Works Ltd. [286 ITR 544], as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling in CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. [(1994) 210 ITR 830], where similar principles were upheld. Additionally, the AR argues that the revenue’s reliance on Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is misplaced, as this provision applies only when a subsidy or g…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, VADODARA vs. M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1383/AHD/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…ring plant and machinery but was instead linked to post-commencement operations, the same should not be reduced from the cost of fixed assets. 4.4. The AR also referred to the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s decision in CIT vs. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd. [183 ITR 591] and CIT vs. Swastik Sanitary Works Ltd. [286 ITR 544], as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling in CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. [(1994) 210 ITR 830], where similar principles were upheld. Additionally, the AR argues that the revenue’s reliance on Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is misplaced, as this provision applies only when a subsidy or g…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, VADODARA vs. M/S. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1382/AHD/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…ring plant and machinery but was instead linked to post-commencement operations, the same should not be reduced from the cost of fixed assets. 4.4. The AR also referred to the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s decision in CIT vs. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd. [183 ITR 591] and CIT vs. Swastik Sanitary Works Ltd. [286 ITR 544], as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling in CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. [(1994) 210 ITR 830], where similar principles were upheld. Additionally, the AR argues that the revenue’s reliance on Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is misplaced, as this provision applies only when a subsidy or g…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4,, VADODARA vs. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1619/AHD/2008[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 43(1)

…ring plant and machinery but was instead linked to post-commencement operations, the same should not be reduced from the cost of fixed assets. 4.4. The AR also referred to the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court’s decision in CIT vs. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd. [183 ITR 591] and CIT vs. Swastik Sanitary Works Ltd. [286 ITR 544], as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling in CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. [(1994) 210 ITR 830], where similar principles were upheld. Additionally, the AR argues that the revenue’s reliance on Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is misplaced, as this provision applies only when a subsidy or g…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1),, VADODARA vs. MUNJAL AUTO INDUSTRIES LTD.,, VADODARA

ITA 2007/AHD/2007[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER &\nSHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Waghe Prasadrao, Sr.DR
Section 43(1)

…plant and machinery but was instead linked to\npost-commencement operations, the same should not be reduced from the\ncost of fixed assets.\n4. 4. The AR also referred to the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in\nCIT vs. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd. [183 ITR 591] and CIT vs. Swastik\nSanitary Works Ltd. [286 ITR 544], as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court's\nruling in CIT vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. [(1994) 210 ITR 830], where similar\nprinciples were upheld. Additionally, the AR argues that the revenue's\nreliance on Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) is misplaced, as this provision\napplies only when a subsidy…

ASST CIT (LTU) 1, MUMBAI vs. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1248/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

…e on the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case Pr. CIT Vs M/s. Welspun Steel Ltd (Appeal No.1743 of 2016 dated 26/02/2019) and also on the decisions of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd.,reported in 183 ITR 591 and CIT v/s. Swastik Sanitary Works Ltd., reported in 286 ITR 544. Accordingly we hold that the incentive cannot be reduced from the actual cost of Plant and Machinery and that resultant disallowance of depreciation be deleted. This ground is allowed in favour of the assessee. Transfer Pricing Adjustment – Ground No.8 39. The Transfer Pricing Of…

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT LTU, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1065/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Ms. A. Alankrutha, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 115JSection 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 37Section 40Section 43BSection 80I

…e on the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case Pr. CIT Vs M/s. Welspun Steel Ltd (Appeal No.1743 of 2016 dated 26/02/2019) and also on the decisions of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v/s. Grace Paper Industries Pvt. Ltd.,reported in 183 ITR 591 and CIT v/s. Swastik Sanitary Works Ltd., reported in 286 ITR 544. Accordingly we hold that the incentive cannot be reduced from the actual cost of Plant and Machinery and that resultant disallowance of depreciation be deleted. This ground is allowed in favour of the assessee. Transfer Pricing Adjustment – Ground No.8 39. The Transfer Pricing Of…

ACC LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (LTU), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 800/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. DCIT (LTU) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. CIT – 3(4) v. M/s. ACC Limited 29th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chai…

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-3(4), MUMBAI-400005 vs. M/S. ACC LIMITED, MUMBAI-400020

In the result, appeal filed by department is dismissed

ITA 1171/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Limited V. Dcit (Ltu) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29Th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit – 3(4) V. M/S. Acc Limited 29Th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. ACC Limited v. DCIT (LTU) 121, Cement House, M.K. Road 29th Floor, Center-1 Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai - 400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. CIT – 3(4) v. M/s. ACC Limited 29th Floor, Center-1 Cement House,121, M.K. Road World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Churchgate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 PAN: AAACT1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Yogesh Thar, Shri Chai…

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3177/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…arises whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v. Grace Paper Industries (P.) Ltd. [1990] 183 ITR 591/52 Taxman 18. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:— "We have carefully considered the provisio…

ACC LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT(LTU) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3137/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…arises whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v. Grace Paper Industries (P.) Ltd. [1990] 183 ITR 591/52 Taxman 18. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:— "We have carefully considered the provisio…

DCIT(LTU) - 1, MUMBAI vs. ACC LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3246/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Acc Ltd., V. Dcit – Range – 1(1) Mumbai {Formerly Known As The Associated Cement Companies, Ltd.,} Cement House, 121 M.K. Road, Churchgate Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit (Ltu)-1 V. M/S. Acc Ltd., 29Th Floor, Centre No.1 Cement House, 121 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade M.K. Road, Churchgate Mumbai - 400005 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaact1507C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…arises whether such subsidy would be adjustable towards assessee's costs of acquisition of capital assets. We may notice that, a similar question was considered by Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in case of CIT v. Grace Paper Industries (P.) Ltd. [1990] 183 ITR 591/52 Taxman 18. The Court noted that, the subsidy was granted by the Government for development of industries in back-ward areas. It was not part of the actual cost of plant or machinery. The Court, therefore, held that it could not have been deducted towards costs of acquisition. The Court held as under:— "We have carefully considered the provisio…

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Grace Paper Industries (P.) Ltd. (183 ITR 591) — Cited in 34 Judgments | BharatTax