CIT v. Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd.

198 ITR 535High Court1992#12394 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing CIT v. Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. THE ACIT (IT)1(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 803/MUM/2009[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blestandard Chartered Bank V. Acit – Range-1(3) Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Adit (It)– 2(3) V. Standard Chartered Bank Room No. 120, 1St Floor Taxation Department, 23-25 Scindia House, Ballard Estate M.G. Road, 3Rd Floor N.M. Marg, Mumbai - 400038 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcs4681D (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri P.J. Pardiwala & Assessee Represented By : Shri Fenil Bhatt Shri Soumendu Kumar Dash Department Represented By :

Section 115JSection 14ASection 90Section 90(2)

…HC) (iii). CIT vs. Rex Talkies (18 Taxman 363 (Karnataka - HC) (iv). CIT vs. Oxford University Press 108 ITR 166 (Bom - HC) (v). ACIT vs. India United Mills Ltd (8 Taxman 182) (Bom - HC) (vi). Empire Jute Co. Ltd - 124 ITR 1 (SC) (vii). Tea Estate (P) Ltd. - 198 ITR 535 (Cal) (viii). Nila Products - 148 ITR 99 (Bom) (ix). Bhagat Industries Corporation - 126 ITR 645 (P&H) (x). Girdhari Dass & Sons - 105 ITR 339 (All) (xi). Assam Bengal Cement Co Ltd. - 27 ITR 34 (SC) (xii). Ooty Dasaprakash - 237 ITR 902 (Mad) (xiii). B and A Plantation and Industries - 242 ITR 22 (Gau) (xiv). HEDE Consultancy P Ltd. - 258 ITR 38…

MR. ASHIM KRISHNA BHATTA,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-49(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 40/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata21 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 263

…doubting the genuineness of the expenditure. So the issue before us is whether the expenditure is of revenue or capital in nature. We have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd. reported in [1992] 198 ITR 535 (Cal) as cited before us by the counsel of the assessee wherein the Hon’ble Court has held that where the assessee has replaced the part of trucks being petrol engine by diesel engine, the said replacement could not be considered as bringing into existence any new asset or any new advantage of enduring character t and therefore expenditure incurr…

BHAGWATI GASES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 345/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

…by changing the worn out cylinder, the assessee has effected to preserve and maintain the asset, in this case the compressor. For doing so, we rely on the ration decidendi laid by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision in CIT Vs. Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd. 198 ITR 535 (Cal) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has held as under: “We now refer to a landmark judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the context of classification of expenditure as revenue or capital. In the case of CIT Vs. Saravana Spg. Mills (P) Ltd. 293 ITR 201/163 Taxman 201, the Court held that the expression "current repairs" denotes repairs which ar…

DCIT, CIR-8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S BHAGWATI GASES LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 339/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Apr 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

DCIT,CIR - 11(2),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PHOENIX CONVEYOR BELT INDIA PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 59/KOL/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2019AY 2007-2008

Bench: : Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Saurav Kumar, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate

Section 31

…ture incurred by the taxpayer for replacing the chamber assembly would come within the meaning of "current repairs". " M/s Phoenix Conveyor India Pvt. Ltd. 3 It is also seen that the jurisdictional High Court in the Case of CIT Vs. Tea Estate (P) Ltd. [19921 198 ITR 535 (Col) held that where a replacement is made of a physically, commercially and functionally inseparable part of an entire asset, the expense incurred in relation to such transaction must be treated as an admissible revenue expenditure. In light of the above discussion & findings, after perusing the facts of the case and respectfully following the…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. GUJARAT GUARDIAN LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue against the direction of the Ld

ITA 1106/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.K.Yadav & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Centre, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle- New Friends Colony, 10(2), New Delhi Cr Building, Ip Estate, Pan: Aaacg1622K New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. M/S. Guajarat Guardian Ltd, Circle-12(1), (Now Circle-10(2), 4-7/C, Dda Shopping Cr Building, Ip Estate, Centre, New Delhi New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaacg1622K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Meeta Singh CIT DR

Section 144Section 144CSection 14A

…(Cal)  Super Spinning Mills Ltd. v. ACIT: 357 ITR 720 (Mad)  CIT v. Indian Woollen Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd.: 112 ITR 441 (P&H)  CIT v. Shree Hari Industries: 161 ITR 249 (Raj.)  CIT v. Madras Spinners Ltd.: 177 ITR 498 (Ker.)  CIT v. Tea Estate Pvt. Ltd.: 198 ITR 535 (Cal.)  CIT v. Madras Spinners Ltd.: 207 ITR 35 (Ker.)  CIT v. Sree Bhagvathi Textiles Ltd.: 207 ITR 826 (Ker.)  CIT v. Co-operative Sugars Limited: 235 ITR 343 (Ker.)  CIT v. Udaipur Distillary Co. Ltd.: 268 ITR 451 (Raj.)  CIT vs. Prabhu Spg. Mills (P) Ltd.: 113 TTJ 372 (ITAT) (Chennai)  ACIT v. Shiva Texyarn Ltd.: ITA No. 2231/Mds/2014 (…

HINDUSTAN ICE COLD STORAGE CO LTD,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T,CIR- 8,KOLKATA., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 203/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.203/Kol/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2006-2007) Hindusthan Ice & Cold Vs. Dcit, Circle-8, Kolkata Storage Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, C/O D.J.Shah & Co., Chowringhee Square, Kalyan Bhavan, Kolkata-69 2 Elgin Road, Kolkata-20 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaach 6265 K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R Revenue By : Md. Ghayas Uddin, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 07/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 21/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2006-2007, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Xxxii, Kolkata In Appeal No.32/Xxxii/11-12/R&T/Cir-8/Kol, Dated 07.11.2012, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 28.11.2008. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its The Return Of Income On 27.11.2006 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.16,45,711/- For The Assessment Year 2006-07. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S. 143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Addition On Account Of Revenue Expenditure Claimed By The Assessee In Respect Of Repairs & Replacement Of Block Hindusthan Ice & Cold Storage Co. Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/RFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

…torage Co. Ltd. i) Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd., [1989] 177 ITR 377; ii) Assam Bengal Cement Companies Ltd. [1955] 27 ITR 34 iii) Associated Cement Companies ltd. [1988] 172 ITR 257 iv) Empire Jute Co. Ltd. [1980] 124 ITR 1(SC) v) Tea Estate P. Ltd. [1992] 198 ITR 535 (Cal) Saravana Spt. Mills (P) Ltd. 293 ITR 201 vi) 5.2 On the other hand, Ld. DR for the revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the AO, which we have already noted in our earlier paragraphs and the same is not being repeated for the sake of brevity. 5.3. Having heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on recor…

ITO, WD-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S STOLL BERG INDIA PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 310/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narsimha Charyassessment Years:2006-07

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…held that “it cannot be taken as a matter of assumption that merely because a large sum is expended on repairs to machinery it must necessarily amount to reconstruction making the expenditure capital in nature. In the case of CIT v Tea Estate (P) Ltd. [1972] 198 ITR 535 (Cal), the jurisdictional High Court held that where a replacement is made of a physically, commercially and functionally inseparable part of an entire asset, the expense incurred in relation to such transaction must be treated as an admissible revenue expenditure.” In another case of Cultural Enterprises Corporation v. CIT [1992] 196 ITR 488 (Ca…