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

Sections most often in play

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

Issues it is cited on

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

Judgments citing CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Ltd.

ACIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited, Neyveli

In the result, the Revenue’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 374/CHNY/2004[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jun 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos. 374/2004, 529/2006 & 222/2009 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2000-01. The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Neyveli Lignite Of Income Tax, Corporation Ltd, Company Circle Iv(4), Neyveli 607 801. Chennai

For Respondent: Shri. E.S. Nagendra Prasad
Section 31Section 37

…for its use is replaced by something which makes it possible for the existing set up to function efficiently, the cost incurred on such replacement would be revenue expenditure." The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M/s. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd.[2007] 293 ITR 201(SC); [ 2007] 10 JT 111(SC), I.T.A.No. 374/04, 529/06, 222/09, :- 9 -: 782/05 & 177/09. while interpreting the words "current repairs" in Section 31 of the Income-tax Act, it has been held as follows (page 208):- ".......... If an autoleveler is to be repaired then that repair would come within the connotation of the word "current repairs" beca…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Snowman Logistics Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10 is partly allowed

ITA 382/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jun 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)For Respondent: Shri Cherian K Baby, CA
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…lacement of tyres and pallets. In support of his contention, the learned Departmental Representative placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements :- (i) Super Spinning Mills Ltd. V ACIT (357 ITR 720 (SC) (ii) CIT V Sarvanna Spinning Mills P. Ltd. (293 ITR 201) (SC) 6.4 Per contra, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee supported the finding of the learned CIT(A) on this issue in the impugned order and reiterated the contentions made before the authorities below. It was contended that the trucks of the refrigerated division run across the country transporting frozen food items. The tyre…

Chennai Auto Agency Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1219/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Feb 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Vikas Awasthyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1219/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2005-06 M/S Chennai Auto Agency Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner 144, Anna Salai, V. Of Income Tax, Chennai - 600 002. Company Circle – I(3), Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaacc 4158 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT
Section 32

…Assessing Officer, 2 I.T.A. No. 1219/Mds/2014 by placing reliance on Explanation – 1 to sec. 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') and also on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Saravana Spinning Mills Private Limited (293 ITR 201)(SC) has taken the view that the said expenditure was capital in nature. Accordingly he disallowed the claim of the assessee. The Ld CIT(Appeals) also confirmed the disallowance so made by fully placing reliance on Explanation 1 to sec. 32 of the Act. 3. The Ld A.R further submitted that the Explanation 1 to sec. 32 shall apply only if the rel…

Pandian Chemicals Ltd., Madurai vs. DCIT, Madurai

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

ITA 2613/CHNY/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2015AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Vikas Awasthy

For Appellant: Shri. S. Chandrasekaran, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V. Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(2)

…laced the rotor blades and part of the stem of windmill. It is not the case where the entire windmill has been replaced with the new one. The learned Authorised Representative to support his submission placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble reported as 293 ITR 201 and the decision of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. V. Renu Sugar Power Co. Ltd reported as 298 ITR 94. 4. On the other hand, Shri. A.V. Sreekanth representing the Department supported the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The learned Departmental Representative pointed out that in the grounds of appeal raised b…

Surinder Madan

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/364/2013HC Delhi22 Aug 2013
Section 260ASection 30

…unt spent should be in nature of current repairs and secondly it should not be in nature of capital expenditure. When twin conditions are satisfied, deduction under Section 30(a)(ii) can be allowed. 7. In CIT vs. Saravana Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (2007) 293 ITR 201 (SC), Supreme Court examined the expression current repairs and observed that it denotes repairs which involves renewal. However, the 2013:DHC:4132-DB ITA 364/2013 Page 4 of 14 word „repairs‟ is not to be read in isolation, since the precise…

M/s. Bharat Gears Limited vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central I

ITA-14/2005HC Delhi30 Jun 2011

…Page 8 of 25 treated as expenditure on account of current repairs in view of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court in Sri Mangayarkarsai Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., [2007] 293 ITR 201 (SC). 10. Mrs. Prem Lata Bansal, learned senior counsel appearing for the Revenue, countered the aforesaid submissions adopting the reasons given by the Tribunal and also relying upon the same judgments which are referred to by the learned counsel for the appellant. 11. We have considered the respective submissions. The nature of repairs w…

Commissioner of Inccome Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/95/2011HC Telangana27 Apr 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/165/2010HC Delhi17 Feb 2010
For Respondent: None

…een incurring such expenditure in the past as and when the need arose and it was towards preserving and maintaining the existing asset. The Tribunal also noted several decisions of the Supreme Court including that of CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills P. Ltd: 293 ITR 201(SC). The Tribunal also noted that the department doubted the nature of the expenditure considering the magnitude of the expenditure incurred in the current year compared to the expenditure in the earlier years. The Tribunal b d th t th th iti b l h d t d th ti th t t 2010:DHC:969-DB of the building had been demolished and that the items h…

Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs. M/S Hi Line Pens P.Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/1202/2006HC Delhi15 Sept 2008

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

For Appellant: Ms Prem Lata BansalFor Respondent: Mr Rakesh Gupta, Ms PoonamAhuja
Section 30Section 31Section 32

…pertaining to the assessment year 1997-98 that the revenue has preferred this appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue), first of all, placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Saravana Spinning Mills P.Ltd.;293 ITR 201. However, we find that decision of the Supreme Court was in relation to the expression „current repairs‟ used in Section 31(i) of the said Act, which reads as under :-- “Section 31 REPAIRS AND INSURANCE OF MACHINERY, PLANT AND FURNITURE. In respect of repairs and insurance of machinery, plant or furniture used for the purposes of the b…