CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Ltd.

293 ITR 201Supreme Court of India2007#984 most cited

What is CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Ltd. authority for?

Expenditure for replacement of machinery parts qualifies as 'current repairs' under Section 31(i) of the Income-tax Act if it does not result in a new asset or substantially enhance the existing asset's life. For Section 31(i), the critical factor is whether the expense constitutes current repairs, making the general revenue vs. capital distinction less relevant for that specific section.

109

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. · 293 ITR 201 · Section 31(i) Income Tax Act · current repairs · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · replacement of machinery parts · new asset creation · enhancement of life · deductibility of repairs · Section 32 · business income deduction

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 32Section 115JBSection 133(6)Section 154Section 31Section 37Section 40A(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 31enduring benefitrevenue expenditurecapital expenditureprevious yeartransfersection 143companybusinessprescribedsection 143(3)india

Judgments citing CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Ltd.

VIMALA JAYANTILAL PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE 17(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7063/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 32

…ture instead of capital expenditure. Reverse the depreciation claim on this amount, ensuring compliance with Section 32. Allow the entire cost of machinery tools as a deductible expense in the Profit & Loss account. CIT Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 201 (SC)] The Supreme Court held that replacement of parts of machinery which do not amount to bringing into existence a new asset or enhancing the life of the existing machinery substantially would be treated as revenue expenditure and not capital expenditure. Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. v. CIT [(1989) 177 ITR 377 (SC)] Expenditure incurred to p…

THE ACIT, COCHIN vs. M/S.MFAR HOTELS & RESORTS LTD, COCHIN

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 335/COCH/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail: A.Y. : 2011-12 C.O. No. 13/Coch/2015 : A.Y. : 2011-12 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 335/Coch/15)

For Appellant: Shri Rajakannan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 250

…s capital expenditure. In support of his contention, he relied upon a judgment of apex Court in the case of Ballimal Naval Kishore v. CIT [1997] 224 ITR 414/90 Taxman 402 (SC) and another judgment in the case of the CIT v. Saravana Spg. Mills (P.) Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201/163 Taxman 201 (SC). 5. In Ballimal case (supra), what the assessee did was not only mere repair, but total renovation of the asset by installing new machinery, new furniture, new sanitary fittings and new electrical wiring besides extensively repairing the structure of building. In that context it was held that by no stretch of imagination, can…

THE KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LIMITED,KOLLAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 918/COCH/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 May 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2007-08 The Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd. .......... Appellant Sankaramangalam, Chavara, Kollam 691583 [Pan: Aaact8118R] Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax .......... Respondent Circle - 1, Kollam Appellant By: Shri Rajeev R., Ca Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 13.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.05.2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev R., CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)

…epresentative, it is only in the nature of current repair to maintain the machinery. However, the lower authorities have not examined the claim of the assessee in the light of principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Saravana Spinning Mills P Ltd 293 ITR 201. This 4 ITA Nos. 684 & 685/Coch/2010 Tribunal find that the replacement said to be made by the assessee has to be examined in the light of law laid down by the apex court in the case of Saravana Spinning 3 The Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd. Mills P Ltd (supra). Since the matter has not been examined by the lower authority in the light of judgm…

ASTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW vs. M/S PRAG INDUSTRIES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, appeal of Revenue and Cross Objection of assessee, both are dismissed

ITA 660/LKW/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat, Videshri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 40A(2)

…r acquisition of an asset is capital expenditure and expenditure incurred for repair & existing asset is revenue expenditure. Pecedents in the case of CIT vs. Delhi Press Samachar Patra (P.) Ltd. 322 ITR 590 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills P. Ltd. 293 ITR 201 (SC) support this view. I.T.A. No.660/Lkw/2016 C.O.No.01/Lkw/2017 5 (D.2.) After hearing both sides and after perusal of records, we find that the disallowance out of repair & maintenance did not have sound basis, and was based on suspicion guess work and conjecture only. No material has been brought on record from the side of Revenue to show t…

DCIT, CC -1(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI

Accordingly, there is no substance raised by the department and the same is dismissed

ITA 619/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2003-04
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…ation has claimed it as revenue expenditure, then what is required to be seen is whether these falls in the ambit and scope of current repairs u/s. 31. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 201 (SC) held that under Section 31(i) of the Act, needs to be seen whether the expenditure incurred by the assessee is for “current repairs”. It is irrelevant to consider whether the expenditure is revenue or capital in nature. The relevant extract of the judgement is reproduced hereinbelow: 12. The Legislature intended to stress that under Section…

M/S. HINDALCO INDUSTRIES LTD.(EARLIER KNOWN AS INDIAN ALUMINIUM COMPANY LTD),MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC -1(4) (EARLIER DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-8,KOLKATTA), MUMBAI

ITA 612/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2003-04
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 80Section 80I

…ation has claimed it as revenue expenditure, then what is required to be seen is whether these falls in the ambit and scope of current repairs u/s. 31. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 201 (SC) held that under Section 31(i) of the Act, needs to be seen whether the expenditure incurred by the assessee is for “current repairs”. It is irrelevant to consider whether the expenditure is revenue or capital in nature. The relevant extract of the judgement is reproduced hereinbelow: 12. The Legislature intended to stress that under Section…

DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4372/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…a No. 5 to 8 of the above decision, which is facts of the case and Para No. 15 wherein Hon’ble Page No.| 53 ITA NO.4236 & 4372/MUM/2005 (A.Y: 2001-02) M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited High Court relying on the decision of the Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt Ltd., [2007] 293 ITR 201 (SC) decided the issue in favour of revenue. 64. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that assessee was having several manufacturing lines for individual manufacturing / assembly line for each models of the motor cycles. However, it was submitted that assessee is not in a position to invest e…

M/S. BAJAJ AUTO LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4236/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2024AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Bajaj Auto Limited V. Dcit – Range – 3(1) Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai – 400021 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Range – 3(1) V. M/S. Bajaj Auto Limited Room No. 623, 6Th Floor Bajaj Bhavan, 226-Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan : Aaacb3370K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Vasanti Patel& Shri Kirit Kamdar Department Represented By : Shri Ankush Kapoor

Section 143(4)(b)Section 234Section 35Section 35DSection 37(1)Section 40

…a No. 5 to 8 of the above decision, which is facts of the case and Para No. 15 wherein Hon’ble Page No.| 53 ITA NO.4236 & 4372/MUM/2005 (A.Y: 2001-02) M/s. Bajaj Auto Limited High Court relying on the decision of the Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt Ltd., [2007] 293 ITR 201 (SC) decided the issue in favour of revenue. 64. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that assessee was having several manufacturing lines for individual manufacturing / assembly line for each models of the motor cycles. However, it was submitted that assessee is not in a position to invest e…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOL-I, KOL vs. M/S. JINDAL INDIA LTD.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue

ITA/95/2011HC Calcutta16 Mar 2023

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam & The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : 16Th March, 2023 Appearance : Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, Adv. ...For The Appellant. Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjoy Bhowmick, Adv. Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. ...For The Respondent. The Court : This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30Th November, 2010 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (The Tribunal) In Ita No.368 & 369/Kol/2010 Years 2005- 06 & 2006-07. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration:

Section 2(18)(b)Section 2(22)(e)Section 260ASection 31

…e High Court of Karnataka in the case of Mysore Spun Concrete Pipe Pvt. Ltd. reported in (1992) 194 ITR 159. That apart, the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sarvana Spinning Mills P. Ltd. reported in (2007) 293 ITR 201(SC) will be a clear answer to the issue under consideration. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the said decision held as follows: “To give an example, a compressor is an important part of an air-condition machine. Repair of the compressor will come in the connotation of the word “current repairs” in Section 31(i) of the said Act because the assessee…

ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, COIMBATORE vs. KPR MILLS LTD., COIMBATORE

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1203/CHNY/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Feb 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj (C.A) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 30Section 31Section 37(1)

…see a benefit of enduring nature and hence the expenditure incurred on such replacement is on the nature of Capital expenditure. 4. The Learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the case of CIT Vs. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt Ltd. (293 ITR 201) wherein the Hon ble Supreme Court has approved the line taken in several High Court decisions that where an expenditure falls under sections 30 to 38 but is not allowable on account of the restriction contained in the respective section, it cannot be claimed under the residuary provision of section 37(1). As is evident, the revenue is aggrieved…

M/S. TANFAC INDUSTREIS LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 3 (1),, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

ITA 719/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jan 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R.Vijayaraghavan, (Advocate)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court again in the case of CIT v. Sri Mangayarkarasi Mills P. Ltd. (2009) 315 ITR 114 (SC) and after referring to the decision of Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills (supra) as well as that of CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. 293 ITR 201 (SC), remitted the matter back to the jurisdictional High Court for considering whether the claim of the assessee could be allowed based on the principles laid down in the above mentioned decisions. In the case of CIT v. Indira Cotton Mills (TCA 559 of 2004 dated 15.12.2009), Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court had remitted the question of allowanc…

NANU RESORTS PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1., MARGAO

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 394/PAN/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Aug 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.393 & 394/Pan/2018 Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06 Nanu Resorts Pvt. Acit, Circle-1, Ltd. Margao Nanu House, Varde Vs. Valaulikar Road, Margao- Goa Pan: Aaacn 7114 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Panaji-1, Panaji In Ita Nos.305 & 306/Mrg/2014-15 Dated 02.07.2018 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Dcit, Circle-1, Margao-Goa U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 25.10.2011 For Both A.Y. 2004-05 & A.Y. 2005-06. 2. The Issue Involved In Both These Appeals Are Common Which Relates To Treatment Of Expenditure Incurred By The Assessee For Replacement Of Assets & Renovation As Revenue Or Capital In Nature. For Ay 2004-05, The Quantum Of Expenditure In Dispute Is Of Rs. 10,81,672/- & For Ay 2005-06 It Is Rs. 2,06,379/-. A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 3. Before Us, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Represented The Department.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…182, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. CAMA Hotels Ltd. [2015] 235 Taxman 206 and also considered the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ballimal Naval Kishore [1997] 221 ITR 414 and CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201. The Hon’ble Court held that the expenditure A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 incurred by the assessee is revenue expenditure and not a capital expenditure and thus answered the substantial question of law in favour of assessee and against the revenue. The relevant extract of the said decision are reproduced as under: “ 12. This Court is of the view that…

NANU RESORTS PVT. LTD.,MARGAO vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1., MARGAO

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 393/PAN/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Aug 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.393 & 394/Pan/2018 Assessment Years: 2004-05 & 2005-06 Nanu Resorts Pvt. Acit, Circle-1, Ltd. Margao Nanu House, Varde Vs. Valaulikar Road, Margao- Goa Pan: Aaacn 7114 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : None Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals By The Assessee Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Panaji-1, Panaji In Ita Nos.305 & 306/Mrg/2014-15 Dated 02.07.2018 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Dcit, Circle-1, Margao-Goa U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 25.10.2011 For Both A.Y. 2004-05 & A.Y. 2005-06. 2. The Issue Involved In Both These Appeals Are Common Which Relates To Treatment Of Expenditure Incurred By The Assessee For Replacement Of Assets & Renovation As Revenue Or Capital In Nature. For Ay 2004-05, The Quantum Of Expenditure In Dispute Is Of Rs. 10,81,672/- & For Ay 2005-06 It Is Rs. 2,06,379/-. A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 3. Before Us, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee & Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Represented The Department.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…182, Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. CAMA Hotels Ltd. [2015] 235 Taxman 206 and also considered the decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ballimal Naval Kishore [1997] 221 ITR 414 and CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201. The Hon’ble Court held that the expenditure A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 incurred by the assessee is revenue expenditure and not a capital expenditure and thus answered the substantial question of law in favour of assessee and against the revenue. The relevant extract of the said decision are reproduced as under: “ 12. This Court is of the view that…

M/S SANKAMTAL HOTEL PRIVATE LTD.,BELAGAVI vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 2 (1), BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 191/PAN/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji30 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Sankamtal Hotel Acit, Circle-1, Pvt. Ltd. Belagavi S. Parthasarathi, Advocate, 3/1, Pranava Vs. Complex, 5Th Cross, Malleswaram, Bangalore- 560 003. Pan: Aadcs 5106 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Smt. Pratibha R., Advocate Respondent By : Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), -Belagavi In Ita No.51/Bgm/2016-17 Dated 25.02.2018 Against The Assessment Order Passed By Acit, Circle-2(1), Belagavi U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Dated 14.03.2016 For A.Y. 2008-09. 2. There Is A Delay Of Five Days In Filing The Present Appeal For Which The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Affidavit Are Placed On Record. From The Affidavit, We Note That The Assessee Was Out Of Station When The Appeal Memo Was Sent To Him By The Counsel For Its Signature & Therefore A Short Delay Of 5 Days Occurred. Considering The Petition & In The Interest Of Justice & Fair Play, We Find It Proper To Admit The Appeal & Proceed To Adjudicate Thereon.

For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha R., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mayur Kamble, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 31

…urt of Madras in the case of Pandiyan Hotels Ltd. vs. DCIT in Tax Case Appeal No. 226 of 2018 dated 16.07.2020. 9. Per contra, Ld. Sr. D.R pointed out to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2007] 293 ITR 201(SC) relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) are to be upheld as the expenses are towards renovation of rooms which are for over hauling the entire set up of the assessee and therefore such renovation do not qualify to be called as repair or replacement and allowed as revenue expenditure. 10. We have…

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. M/S. FACOR ALLOYS LIMITED, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 593/VIZ/2019[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2022AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.593/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S Facon Alloys Limited Circle-3(1) Garividi Visakhapatnam Vizianagaram [Pan : Aaaacf8101C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri MN Murthy Naik,CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)

…it is also not in dispute that the assessee has incurred repairs and there is no enhancement of capacity. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee has heavily relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. (SC) 293 ITR 201. We have perused the order of the Ld.CIT(A). For the sake of clarity, we extract order of the Ld.CIT(A) as under : “4.4. At the outset, it is not in dispute that the asset that required repairs is the furnace no. 4 which is submerged Arch furnace. The submerged Arch furnace is one of the furnaces other than open Arch furnace used for 'ferro allo…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, BHARUCH

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 432/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.431/Srt/2018 (Ay 2007-08) & (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Bharuch, Fertilizers & Chemicals Vs Above Bank Of Baroda, Ltd. Station Road, Bharuch- P.O. Narmada Nagar, 320001 Dist. Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./Ita No.432/Srt/2018 & ""या"ेप/C.O. No.12/Srt/2021 [A/O Ita No.432/Srt/2018] (Ay 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Bharuch, Above Bank Of P.O. Narmada Nagar, Dist. Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q Bharuch-320001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent/Co- Objector

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ent repair. Similar disallowance was made in AY 2001-02 & 2002-03, the matter travelled up to Tribunal and the issue was restored back to the file of assessing officer to decide the issue in the light of Supreme Court decision in case Saravana Spinning Mills (293 ITR 201 SC). The assessing officer after examination of the issue granted relief to the assessee. Further similar relief was allowed by Tribunal to the assessee in AY 2003-04 to 2005-06, 2008-09 to 2011-12. The revenue filed appeal before High Court against the order of Tribunal in AY 2003-04 to 2005-06, 2008-09 to 2011-12, which has been dismissed 21 I…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, BHARUCH vs. M/S. GUJARAT NARMADA VALLEY FERTILIZERS & CHEMICALS LTD.,, BHARUCH

In the result, this ground of appeal is also dismissed

ITA 431/SRT/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.431/Srt/2018 (Ay 2007-08) & (Hearing In Virtual Court) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Bharuch, Fertilizers & Chemicals Vs Above Bank Of Baroda, Ltd. Station Road, Bharuch- P.O. Narmada Nagar, 320001 Dist. Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent आ.अ.सं./Ita No.432/Srt/2018 & ""या"ेप/C.O. No.12/Srt/2021 [A/O Ita No.432/Srt/2018] (Ay 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Gujarat Narmada Valley Income-Tax, Circle-1 Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs Bharuch, Above Bank Of P.O. Narmada Nagar, Dist. Baroda, Station Road, Bharuch-392015 Pan : Aaacg 8372 Q Bharuch-320001 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent/Co- Objector

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

…ent repair. Similar disallowance was made in AY 2001-02 & 2002-03, the matter travelled up to Tribunal and the issue was restored back to the file of assessing officer to decide the issue in the light of Supreme Court decision in case Saravana Spinning Mills (293 ITR 201 SC). The assessing officer after examination of the issue granted relief to the assessee. Further similar relief was allowed by Tribunal to the assessee in AY 2003-04 to 2005-06, 2008-09 to 2011-12. The revenue filed appeal before High Court against the order of Tribunal in AY 2003-04 to 2005-06, 2008-09 to 2011-12, which has been dismissed 21 I…

MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSON CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ADDLL .CIT - RG. 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2942/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, Sr. AR
Section 250

…rniture used for the purpose of business or profession is allowed as deduction. The Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. ITA no.2782/Mum./2015 ITA no.2942/Mum./2015 Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., [2007] 293 ITR 201 (SC), held that the object behind the provisions of section 31(i) of the Act is to preserve and maintain the asset and not to bring in a new asset. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that the basic test to find out as to what would constitute current repairs is that the expenditure must have been incurred to ―preserve and maintain‖ an already…

ACIT 14(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2782/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.T. Mathews, Sr. AR
Section 250

…rniture used for the purpose of business or profession is allowed as deduction. The Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Ltd. ITA no.2782/Mum./2015 ITA no.2942/Mum./2015 Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., [2007] 293 ITR 201 (SC), held that the object behind the provisions of section 31(i) of the Act is to preserve and maintain the asset and not to bring in a new asset. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that the basic test to find out as to what would constitute current repairs is that the expenditure must have been incurred to ―preserve and maintain‖ an already…

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA vs. GUJARAT INDUSTRIES POWER CO.LTD.,, BARODA

ITA 1770/AHD/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: 22-04-2022For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR &
Section 115J

…rred towards spare parts which extended the life time of the machinery. Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Ballimal Naval Kishor vs.CIT 222 ITR 414 (SC) and the Supreme Court decision m the case of CIT vs Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt.Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 201 (SC) 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of ITA Nos.1770/Ahd/2012 & Ors. (Gujarat Industrial Power Co. Ltd. ) Rs.18,31,26,525/- on account of Corporate Debt Restructuring (CDR) expenses as capital expenditure. The Id.CIT(A) erred in not-appreciating that the assessee has…

Showing 1–20 of 109 · Page 1 of 6

CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Ltd. (293 ITR 201) — Cited in 109 Judgments | BharatTax