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 366,470 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

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Ltd.

Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-11(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the ground No

ITA 2081/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm& Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2081/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito 11(2)(1), M/S Schott Glass India Pvt. Room No. 425, 4Th Floor, Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 303/304, 3Rd Floor, Dynasty बिधम/ Road, Mumbai-400 020 A Wing, Andheri Kurla Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400 059. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aadcs8583L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant Shri Dhanesh Bafna, Ar : By प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri V. Vinod Kumr, Dr 04.08.2020 Virtual Date Of Hearing : Date Of Pronouncement 15.09.2020 :

For Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumr, DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 30Section 31

…equired to be 16 I.T.A. No. 2081/Mum/2016 M/s Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd. done each year and thus the expenditure incurred for the same cannot be considered as capital in nature. > The assessee places reliance in case of CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Ltd. (293 ITR 201) (SC); Ballimal Naval Kishore v. CIT (225 ITR 414) (SC); New Shorrock Spg & Mfg Co. Ltd. v. CIT (30 ITR 338) (Born HC) and others (please refer the point no. 5.5 of appendix II of the objections filed before Your Honour) > Rebuttal of Assessing Officer's observations while disallowing assessee's claim for deduction under section 31 of the Act O…

Ramco Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Virudhunagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed and the appeal filed by the Revenue also dismissed

ITA 93/CHNY/2017[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2019AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 201/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, Vs. No. 47, P S K. Nagar, Corporate Circle 2, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacr5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 92, 93 & 94/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2005-06 M/S. Ramco Industries Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 47, P S K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Rajapalayam 626 108. Virudhunagar. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri Srinivasa Rao Vana, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri J. Prabhakar, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai, All Dated 03.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2005-06. The Revenue Also Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) For The 2

For Appellant: Shri J. Prabhakar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao Vana, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 37

…ning mill, which only together are capable of manufacture, and there is no intermediate marketable product produced. In our view, this issue has been satisfactorily answered by the recent decision of this court in CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills P. Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201 (SC). In that case this court has held unambiguously that 'each machine in a segment of a textile mill has an independent role to play in the mill and the output of each division is different from the other.' Dealing with a ring frame in a textile mill, this 7 I.T.A. Nos. 92-94/Chny/17 & I.T.A. No. 201/Chny/17 court has held that it is an 'indep…

Ramco Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Virudhunagar

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed and the appeal filed by the Revenue also dismissed

ITA 92/CHNY/2017[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Dec 2019AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 201/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Ramco Industries Limited, Income Tax, Vs. No. 47, P S K. Nagar, Corporate Circle 2, Rajapalayam 626 108. Madurai. [Pan:Aaacr5284J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 92, 93 & 94/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2005-06 M/S. Ramco Industries Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 47, P S K. Nagar, Income Tax, Circle 1, Rajapalayam 626 108. Virudhunagar. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri Srinivasa Rao Vana, Addl. Cit Assessee By : Shri J. Prabhakar, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai, All Dated 03.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2005-06. The Revenue Also Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) For The 2

For Appellant: Shri J. Prabhakar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinivasa Rao Vana, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 37

…ning mill, which only together are capable of manufacture, and there is no intermediate marketable product produced. In our view, this issue has been satisfactorily answered by the recent decision of this court in CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills P. Ltd. [2007] 293 ITR 201 (SC). In that case this court has held unambiguously that 'each machine in a segment of a textile mill has an independent role to play in the mill and the output of each division is different from the other.' Dealing with a ring frame in a textile mill, this 7 I.T.A. Nos. 92-94/Chny/17 & I.T.A. No. 201/Chny/17 court has held that it is an 'indep…

Heidelberg Cement India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

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

ITA 2054/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2011-12 Heidelberg Cement India Ltd., Vs Dcit, 9Th Floor, Tower-C, Circle-2, 3Rd Floor, Infinity Towers, Dlf Cyber City, Vanijya Nikunj, Gurgaon. Hsiidc Building, Udyog Vihar, Ph. V, Pan: Aabcm2359J Near Shankar Chowk, Nh-8, Gurgaon. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, Advocate & Sh. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 1St February, 2016 Of The Cit(A)-1, Gurgaon, Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Grounds Of Appeal No. 1 & 1.1 Raised By The Read As Under:- “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law, In Confirming The Disallowance Made By The Ld. Ao, Amounting To Inr 87,12,690/-, On Account Of Additional Depreciation Claimed By The Appellant On New Plant & Machinery In Accordance With The Provisions Of Section 32(I)(Iia) Of The Act. 1.1 The Ld. Cit(A) / Ld. Ao Erred On Facts & In Law, In Considering Only The Nomenclature Of The Assets To Hold The Disallowance, Without Appreciating The Detailed Nature & Use Of The Assets.”

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 32Section 32(1)(iia)

…ged the order of the CIT(A) in denying the claim of additional depreciation. He submitted that the genuineness of the items purchased are not in dispute. Referring to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills, 293 ITR 201, he submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has held that the manufacturing process in the textile mill was not one continuous integrated process. That each machine including the ring frame was an independent and separate machine capable of independent and specific function and, therefore, the expenditure incurred for repl…