CIT v. Jagajit Industries Limited

241 ITR 556High Court2000#5018 most cited

What is CIT v. Jagajit Industries Limited authority for?

Whether the replacement of parts of machinery constitutes revenue or capital expenditure is primarily a question of fact, dependent on the context of the assessee's business. An enduring benefit alone is not conclusive of capital expenditure.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Jagajit Industries Limited · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · replacement of parts · machinery · question of fact · enduring benefit · 241 ITR 556

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43BSection 68

Judgments citing CIT v. Jagajit Industries Limited

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. RISHIRAJ SINGH, JHALAWAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1073/JPR/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Nov 2025AY 2023-24
For Appellant: Sh. Vinod Gupta, CA &For Respondent: \nMohd. Azharuddin, CA
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…find any reason to sustain the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer.\nAccordingly, I delete the disallowance of Rs.12,80,215. The ground is partly allowed.”\nDelhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jagatjit\nIndustries Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 556 wherein the Hon'ble High Court observed as under:\n“Whether on given set of facts, replacement of certain items, forming an integral or important\npart of the machinery would be revenue expenditure or capital expenditure is primarily a\nquestion of fact, to be decided in the context of the business carried on by an assessee. Merely,\nbecause the…

ACIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD vs. SYNERGIES CASTINGS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in its favour

ITA 641/HYD/2024[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: : Shri Srikanth Reddy Y, DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(va)

…e case of CIT vs. Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe Pvt Ltd (reported in 194 ITR 159) has held that the expenditure on moulds has to be treated as revenue in nature. Similarly, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jagajit Industries Limited reported in 241 ITR 556 had also held that considering the life span of moulds the expenditure towards the same has to be treated as revenue in nature. 4 Therefore, appreciating the facts of the case and the decisions rendered by various higher judiciaries it is evident that in the case of the assessee expenditure incurred towards replacement of the moulds within a sho…

M/S EDISON GENTECH PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. ITO CORP WARD 2 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 713/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:713/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Edison Gentech Private Limited, The Income Tax Officer, No.107-A/115-A, Kakkan Colony, Vs. Corporate Ward – 2(1), Park Side Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Nungambakkam, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 034. Pan : Aabce 3059P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. A.S. Sumanth, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.08.2022

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. A.S. Sumanth, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…nature of replacement of parts of the old machines which continues to exist and remains the capital asset. The tribunal in the impugned order has rightly relied upon the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 556, wherein it has been held as under:- “Whether on given set of facts, replacement of certain items, forming an integral or important part of the machinery would be revenue expenditure or capital expenditure is primarily a question of fact, to be decided in the context of the business carried on by an assessee. Merely, because the benefit accruing…

M/S. AMBICA ALLOYS & STEEL INDIA LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY, CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ground number 2 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1009/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Us, Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That He Shall Not Be Pressing Ground Number 1. Accordingly, Ground Number 1 Of The Assessee’S Appeal Is Being Dismissed As Withdrawn/Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Shah, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr. D.R

…nature of replacement of parts of the old machines which continues to exist and remains the capital asset. The tribunal in the impugned order has rightly relied upon the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 556, wherein it has been held as under:- “Whether on given set of facts, I.T.A No. 1009/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2012-13 Page No. 11 M/s. Ambica Alloys & Steel India Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT Ltd. v. CIT [1980] 124 ITR 1 (SC)]. Normally initial investment on machines and their parts will be in the nature of capital expenditure but replacement of parts of an existing m…

TPR AUTOPARTS MFG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 25(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 7100/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 Apr 2022AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)

…IT vs. Tupperware India (Pvt.) Ltd. [2015] 53 Taxmann.com 232 (Delhi) (vi) CIT vs. Malerkotls Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT vs. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. [2014] 36 ITR 490 (Madras) (viii) CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 556 (Delhi) (ix) CIT vs. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. in ITA NO. 171/2010 dated. 17.10.2011 (Del) (x) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. [2018] 89 taxmann.com 191(Delhi) (xi) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 124 ITR 1(SC) 14. The ld. DR, on the other hand, has heavily relied on the orders of the AO and CIT(A) 15. We have considered rival argument…

SYNERGIES CASTINGS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in its favour

ITA 1827/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1824 to 1827/Hyd/2017 (A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15 M/s. Synergies Castings Vs. DCIT, Limited, Circle-3(2) / Circle-3(3) D.No.6-3-855/10/A, 4A, Hyderabad. Sampathji Apartments, Public School Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. PAN: AAICS 7410 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR Date of hearing: 30/10/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/12/2019 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: All the captioned appeals are file…

SYNERGIES CASTINGS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(3), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in its favour

ITA 1826/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1824 to 1827/Hyd/2017 (A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15 M/s. Synergies Castings Vs. DCIT, Limited, Circle-3(2) / Circle-3(3) D.No.6-3-855/10/A, 4A, Hyderabad. Sampathji Apartments, Public School Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. PAN: AAICS 7410 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR Date of hearing: 30/10/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/12/2019 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: All the captioned appeals are file…

SYNERGIES CASTINGS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in its favour

ITA 1825/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1824 to 1827/Hyd/2017 (A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15 M/s. Synergies Castings Vs. DCIT, Limited, Circle-3(2) / Circle-3(3) D.No.6-3-855/10/A, 4A, Hyderabad. Sampathji Apartments, Public School Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. PAN: AAICS 7410 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR Date of hearing: 30/10/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/12/2019 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: All the captioned appeals are file…

SYNERGIES CASTINGS LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(2) , HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in its favour

ITA 1824/HYD/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2019AY 2011-2012

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1824 to 1827/Hyd/2017 (A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15 M/s. Synergies Castings Vs. DCIT, Limited, Circle-3(2) / Circle-3(3) D.No.6-3-855/10/A, 4A, Hyderabad. Sampathji Apartments, Public School Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. PAN: AAICS 7410 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR Date of hearing: 30/10/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/12/2019 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: All the captioned appeals are file…

SYNERGIES CASTINGS LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIR-3(3), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in its favour

ITA 178/HYD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1824 to 1827/Hyd/2017 (A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15 M/s. Synergies Castings Vs. DCIT, Limited, Circle-3(2) / Circle-3(3) D.No.6-3-855/10/A, 4A, Hyderabad. Sampathji Apartments, Public School Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. PAN: AAICS 7410 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Sri Nilanjan Dey, DR Date of hearing: 30/10/2019 Date of pronouncement: 19/12/2019 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.: All the captioned appeals are file…

TPR AUTOPARTS MFG INDIA PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 25(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4744/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Tpr Autoparts Mfg. India Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Mayur Batra & Co., Ca, Circle-25(2), 7, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aacct9433D (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate Deptt. By : Shri H.K. Choudhary, Cit, Dr & Ms Nidhi Sharma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27Th December, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-44, New Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Company Is A Wholly Owned Subsidiary Of M/S Teikoku Piston Ring Co. Ltd. (Japan). It Had Been Incorporated On 27.03.2008 With The Main Object To Carry On The Business To Manufacture, Export, Buy & Sell & Otherwise Deal In ‘Moulded’ Automobile Products I.E. Piston Rings, Cylinder Liners, Valve Seat Rings & Other Automotive Parts. It Is The Third Year Of Its Existence, Though Effectively It Is The Second Year Of Production After Its Set Up & Commencement Of Business In The Fy 2009-10. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.11.2011 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.6,45,23,822/-. Since The Assessee Had Entered Into Certain International Transactions With Its Aes, The Assessing Officer Referred The Matter To The Transfer Pricing Officer U/S 92Ca Of The Act For Determination Of The Arm’S Length Price Of Such International Transactions. The Tpo, During The Course Of Tp Assessment Proceedings, Observed That The Assessee Company Has Undertaken The Following International Transactions With Its Aes:- No. Nature Of Transaction Method Amount (In Rs.) Purchase Of Raw 1 5,85,47,963 Materials/Assets/Spares Tnmm Payment Of Royalty 76,32,183 2 Tnmm 3 Reimbursement Of Expenses To Ae 9,14,253 -

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate
Section 92C

…CIT vs. Tupperware India (Pvt.) Ltd. [2015] 53 Taxmann.com 232 (Delhi) 12 CIT vs. Malerkotls Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 49 (P&H) (vii) CIT vs. Aditya Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. [2014] 36 ITR 490 (Madras) (viii) CIT vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 556 (Delhi) (ix) CIT vs. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. in ITA NO. 171/2010 dated. 17.10.2011 (Del) (x) CIT vs. Sunbeam Auto Ltd. [2018] 89 taxmann.com 191(Delhi) (xi) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 124 ITR 1(SC) 14. The ld. DR, on the other hand, has heavily relied on the orders of the AO and CIT(A) 15. We have considered rival argument…

M/S. ESSILOR MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD,,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2125/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas K. Suryawanshi, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154

…Rs. 154.11 Lakhs including glass moulds of Rs. 29.06 Lakhs. The ld. AR of assessee placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements. A) CIT Vs. Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe (P) Ltd. (Kar), 1991 194 ITR 159 B) CT Vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (Delhi) 2000 241 ITR 556 C) CIT Vs. Aditya Ferro Allyos (P) Ltd. (2014) 51 taxmann.com 529 (Madras HC) D) CIT Vs. Malerkotla Steel & Alloys (P) Ltd. (2011) 10 taxmann.com 278 (Punjab & Haryana HC) E) B.R. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Gupta, CIT 113 ITR 647 (SC) F) CIT Vs. Margarine & Refined Oils Co. Ltd. (Kar) 2006 154 Taxman 95 (Karnataka HC) 10. As against this, ld. DR of revenue s…

M/S. ESSILOR MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PRIVATE LTD,,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2124/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas K. Suryawanshi, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154

…Rs. 154.11 Lakhs including glass moulds of Rs. 29.06 Lakhs. The ld. AR of assessee placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements. A) CIT Vs. Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe (P) Ltd. (Kar), 1991 194 ITR 159 B) CT Vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (Delhi) 2000 241 ITR 556 C) CIT Vs. Aditya Ferro Allyos (P) Ltd. (2014) 51 taxmann.com 529 (Madras HC) D) CIT Vs. Malerkotla Steel & Alloys (P) Ltd. (2011) 10 taxmann.com 278 (Punjab & Haryana HC) E) B.R. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Gupta, CIT 113 ITR 647 (SC) F) CIT Vs. Margarine & Refined Oils Co. Ltd. (Kar) 2006 154 Taxman 95 (Karnataka HC) 10. As against this, ld. DR of revenue s…

ESSILOR MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 239/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas K. Suryawanshi, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154

…Rs. 154.11 Lakhs including glass moulds of Rs. 29.06 Lakhs. The ld. AR of assessee placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements. A) CIT Vs. Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe (P) Ltd. (Kar), 1991 194 ITR 159 B) CT Vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (Delhi) 2000 241 ITR 556 C) CIT Vs. Aditya Ferro Allyos (P) Ltd. (2014) 51 taxmann.com 529 (Madras HC) D) CIT Vs. Malerkotla Steel & Alloys (P) Ltd. (2011) 10 taxmann.com 278 (Punjab & Haryana HC) E) B.R. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Gupta, CIT 113 ITR 647 (SC) F) CIT Vs. Margarine & Refined Oils Co. Ltd. (Kar) 2006 154 Taxman 95 (Karnataka HC) 10. As against this, ld. DR of revenue s…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ESSILOR MANUFACTURING INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 211/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas K. Suryawanshi, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154

…Rs. 154.11 Lakhs including glass moulds of Rs. 29.06 Lakhs. The ld. AR of assessee placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements. A) CIT Vs. Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe (P) Ltd. (Kar), 1991 194 ITR 159 B) CT Vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (Delhi) 2000 241 ITR 556 C) CIT Vs. Aditya Ferro Allyos (P) Ltd. (2014) 51 taxmann.com 529 (Madras HC) D) CIT Vs. Malerkotla Steel & Alloys (P) Ltd. (2011) 10 taxmann.com 278 (Punjab & Haryana HC) E) B.R. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Gupta, CIT 113 ITR 647 (SC) F) CIT Vs. Margarine & Refined Oils Co. Ltd. (Kar) 2006 154 Taxman 95 (Karnataka HC) 10. As against this, ld. DR of revenue s…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S ESSILOR MANUFACTURING INDIA PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1166/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas K. Suryawanshi, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154

…Rs. 154.11 Lakhs including glass moulds of Rs. 29.06 Lakhs. The ld. AR of assessee placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements. A) CIT Vs. Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe (P) Ltd. (Kar), 1991 194 ITR 159 B) CT Vs. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (Delhi) 2000 241 ITR 556 C) CIT Vs. Aditya Ferro Allyos (P) Ltd. (2014) 51 taxmann.com 529 (Madras HC) D) CIT Vs. Malerkotla Steel & Alloys (P) Ltd. (2011) 10 taxmann.com 278 (Punjab & Haryana HC) E) B.R. Ltd. Vs. V.P. Gupta, CIT 113 ITR 647 (SC) F) CIT Vs. Margarine & Refined Oils Co. Ltd. (Kar) 2006 154 Taxman 95 (Karnataka HC) 10. As against this, ld. DR of revenue s…

PATEL ALLOY STEEL CO. PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT., CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 706/AHD/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2019AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Kr. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…oduction process of the assessee. The expenditure incurred in the production process and on replacement of damaged moulds etc., was held to be revenue expenditure. "Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe Pvt. Ltd."(supra), was followed in "CIT v. Jagajit Industries Ltd.", 241 ITR 556(Del), to hold that the moulds in question did not enhance the capacity of the existing machines and were more replacements for the moulds damaged, during the process of manufacture of glass. Similarly, expenditure on replacement of moulds was held to be revenue expenditure in "CIT v. Malerkotla Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd.", 49 DTR 1(P&H). Following…

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. PATEL ALLOY STEEL CO. PVT.LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1389/AHD/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jan 2019AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Ms. Urvashi Shodhan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Kr. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…oduction process of the assessee. The expenditure incurred in the production process and on replacement of damaged moulds etc., was held to be revenue expenditure. "Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe Pvt. Ltd."(supra), was followed in "CIT v. Jagajit Industries Ltd.", 241 ITR 556(Del), to hold that the moulds in question did not enhance the capacity of the existing machines and were more replacements for the moulds damaged, during the process of manufacture of glass. Similarly, expenditure on replacement of moulds was held to be revenue expenditure in "CIT v. Malerkotla Steels & Alloys (P) Ltd.", 49 DTR 1(P&H). Following…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. METSO MINERALS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 6681/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ited Mills Ltd., 141 ITR 399 (Bom) CIT vs Kaira District Co-op Milk Producers Union Ltd., 192 ITR 608 (Guj) Comfort Living Hotels (P) Ltd. vs CIT (ITA No.67 of 2001) CIT vs Satyadeo Chemicals Ltd. (1997) 226 ITR 95 (Guj) CIT vs Jagatjit Industries Ltd. (2000) 241 ITR 556 (Dei) CIT vs Co-op. Sugars Ltd. (239 ITR 908) (Ker) SLR filed by the Revenue against this judgement has been dismissed by the Supreme Court reported at (1998)234 ITR ST 32 k) While examining the expenditure being revenue or capital, regard must be had to rapid strides in science and technology. The revenue has to take into consideration the need…

M/S AKSHAY STEEL WORKS PVT. LTD.,JHARKHAND vs. DCIT, CIR-3, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 823/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 823/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 M/S Akshaya Steel Works Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-3, Kolkata [Pan: Aacca 5821 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kartik Kurmy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)

…l be in the nature of current repairs. Entries made in the books of account for treating the expenditure as capital would not be a decisive test to determine that the expenditure was capital in nature. Similarly, in the case of Jagatjit Industries Ltd. [2000] 241 ITR 556, the Delhi High Court has held that the expenditure on replacement of damaged moulds was revenue expenditure. In the case of Co-operative Sugars Ltd. [1999] 235 ITR 343, the Kerala High Court has held that expenditure on "machinery maintenance" of sugar plant by replacing substantial part of the plant was revenue expenditure as no new asset was b…

Showing 1–20 of 23 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Jagajit Industries Limited (241 ITR 556) — Cited in 23 Judgments | BharatTax