Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT

194 ITR 294Supreme Court of India1992#3421 most cited

What is Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

If the actual cost of an asset was wrongly assessed in earlier years, it can be recomputed and corrected in subsequent assessment years. Interest incurred before production on borrowed money for plant construction can be capitalized and added to the cost of fixed assets.

35

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 1992 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT · actual cost · depreciation allowance · recomputation of actual cost · capitalized interest · fixed assets · borrowed money · commencement of production

Also reported as

60 Taxmann 412

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 29Section 30Section 32

Issues it is cited on

section 43dsection 10(5)section 32(2)section 10(1)section 43(6)opening wdvsection 80hhcsection 80hhwritten down valuesection 16section 34section 30

Judgments citing Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT

Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed while the appeal of revenue is treated as dismissed

ITA 1532/KOL/2015[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 May 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] I.T.A. No. 1532/Kol/2015 Assessment Year 2003-04 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………….Appellant Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Acit, Circle 8 Kolkata,...................…………………………………………………….Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata - 700069 I.T.A. No. 167/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2003-04 Dcit, Circle 11(1) Kolkata.............................………………………………………..Appellant P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd..............................………………………………………Respondent Bengal Eco Intelligent Park (Techno) Tower 1, Block Em, Plot-3, Salt Lake City, Sec-V, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata – 700 091 [Pan: Aaach 7360 R] Appearances By: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 234D

…ever, depreciation relating to the block assets viz. ‘plant and machinery – others’ of Rs. 1,10,08,966/- was not accounted for by the assessee as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Saharanpur Electricity Supply Co. Ltd. vs CIT 194 ITR 294 resulting in excess amount of depreciation to that extent. In this regard, the explanation offered by the assessee- 3 I.T.A. Nos. 1532 & 167/Kol/2015 & 2016 company during the course of reassessment proceedings was not acceptable by the A.O. and he proceeded to make a disallowance of Rs. 1,10,08,966/- being excess claim of depreciation made by…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer vs. M/S. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 937/JPR/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…the actual cost to the transferee-company will be the WDV of the holding company (transferor-company). 13. The assessee based its submission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer vs. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 935/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…the actual cost to the transferee-company will be the WDV of the holding company (transferor-company). 13. The assessee based its submission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer vs. M/S. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 934/JPR/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…the actual cost to the transferee-company will be the WDV of the holding company (transferor-company). 13. The assessee based its submission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer vs. M/S. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 933/JPR/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…the actual cost to the transferee-company will be the WDV of the holding company (transferor-company). 13. The assessee based its submission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer vs. M/S. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 890/JPR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Feb 2018AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Porwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 271(1)(c)Section 32

…the actual cost to the transferee-company will be the WDV of the holding company (transferor-company). 13. The assessee based its submission relying on Maharana Mills P. Ltd. v. ITO [1959] 36 ITR 350 (SC) and Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 294 (SC). The ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer assessee has also relied on Ciba of India Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 1 (Bom) as also on CIT v. Hides and Leather Products P. Ltd. [1975] 101 ITR 61 (Guj). It is required to be noted that the Revenue as well as the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the apex court in the case of…

Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs. M/S Maruti Udyog Ltd

ITA/250/2005HC Delhi07 Dec 2017

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 14ASection 43B

…1999 can be capitalised with retrospective effect and depreciation calculated by including the said amount in the AY 1999-2000? The ITAT has answered the question in favour of the Assessee. In view of the decisions in Sharanpur Electric Supply Ltd. (1992) 194 ITR 294 (SC); CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. [2009] 312 ITR 254 (SC); CIT v. Funskool (India) Ltd. (2007) 294 ITR 642 (Mad.); CIT v. Noida Medicare Centre Ltd (2015) 378 ITR ITA No.250/2005 Page 5 of 6 65(Del) and DGIT v. Official Liquidator (2008) 305 ITR 418(Mad.), question (v) is answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the…

Analjit Singh, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 16(2), Delhi

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

ITA 4737/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Dec 2017AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P.Kant

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50D

…levance in view of the specific nature of assets under dispute in the present case. The cost in the present case has to be governed by the specific provisions of the Act. Regarding reliance placed on the judgment in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. (194 ITR 294), it deals with the actual cost for the purposes of section 43(1) of the Act, whereas the case of Escort Farms reported in 222 ITR 508 relied upon by the appellant refers to cost of acquisition of bonus shares under the pre- amended provisions of the Act. Reference to Miss Dhun Dadabhoi Kapadia (63 ITR 651) refers to renunciation of rights in sha…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sical Logistics Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1697/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…lowed to be added to the cost of investment only because in this year no deduction is allowable because the dividend income has been made exempt’’. The following observations of Supreme Court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 294 (SC) were relied on by the Court:- ‘’In case money is borrowed by a newly started company which is in the process of constructing and erecting its plant, the interest incurred before the commencement of production on such borrowed money can be capitalised and added to the cost of the fixed assets’’. 7.18 A bare look at the above observations re…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sical Logistics Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1696/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…lowed to be added to the cost of investment only because in this year no deduction is allowable because the dividend income has been made exempt’’. The following observations of Supreme Court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 294 (SC) were relied on by the Court:- ‘’In case money is borrowed by a newly started company which is in the process of constructing and erecting its plant, the interest incurred before the commencement of production on such borrowed money can be capitalised and added to the cost of the fixed assets’’. 7.18 A bare look at the above observations re…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Sical Logistics Ltd., Chennai

ITA 1695/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Milind Madhukar, JCIT &For Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 10Section 14A

…lowed to be added to the cost of investment only because in this year no deduction is allowable because the dividend income has been made exempt’’. The following observations of Supreme Court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 294 (SC) were relied on by the Court:- ‘’In case money is borrowed by a newly started company which is in the process of constructing and erecting its plant, the interest incurred before the commencement of production on such borrowed money can be capitalised and added to the cost of the fixed assets’’. 7.18 A bare look at the above observations re…

Aban Offshore Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly

ITA 450/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohana Rao, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 24Section 36(1)(iii)Section 48Section 92C

…allowed to be added to the cost of investment only because in this year no deduction is allowable because the dividend income has been made exempt’’. The following observations of Supreme Court in the case of Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd vs. CIT (1992) 194 ITR 294 (SC) were relied on by the Court:- ‘’In case money is borrowed by a newly started company which is in the process of constructing and erecting its plant, the interest incurred before the commencement of production on such borrowed money can be capitalised and added to the cost of the fixed assets’’. 31.7 A bare look at the above observations rev…

Bharat Homes Ltd., Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. - 9(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6792/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Amit Shukla (Jm) I.T.A. No. 6792/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year 2008-09)

Section 6

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” Bench, Mumbai Before S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Amit Shukla (JM) I.T.A. No. 6792/Mum/2011 (Assessment Year 2008-09) M/s. Bharat Homes Ltd. Asst.CIT 9(1) 1st Floor, A.N. House Vs. Mumbai 31st Road, TPS III Bandra West MUMBAI-400 050. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No.AAACB3564H Assessee by Shri Hariom Tulsyan Department by Smt. Rajeshwari Motwani Date of Hearing 3.5.2016 Date of Pronouncement 27.5.2016 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran, AM :- The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.08.2011 passed by Ld CIT(A)-19, Mumbai for assessment year 2…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Hybrid Rice International Pvt. Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/333/2008HC Delhi09 Oct 2009

Bench: Becoming An “Assessee” Can Still Be Treated As Actual Cost To The Assessee In Complete Disregard To The Peculiar Circumstances Of The Case?”

Section 32Section 43

…ITA Nos. 333/2008 & 338/2008 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No. 333/2008 & ITA No.338/2008 Reserved on : 11th August, 2009 Pronounced on: 9th October, 2009 1. ITA No.333/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...Petitioner Through: Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Mr. Paras Chaudhary,Advocates. VERSUS HYBRID RICE INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD. ....Respondent Through: Mr. C.S.Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. 2. ITA No. 338/2008 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME…

Commissioner of Income-Tax(Central) vs. M/S. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg.(Wvg.)Co.Ltd

The appeal is partly allowed

C.A. No.-002916-002916 - 1980Supreme Court29 Apr 1992
For Respondent: GWALIOR RAYON SILK MANUFACTURING CO. LTD
Section 256(1)Section 256(2)Section 32

…pon by the department may not normally be upset even though a different view of law may reasonably be possible unless the perceptions and circumstances warrant fresh look. [1030 A] Saharanpur Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. C.I.T., [1992] 194 ITR 294, referred to. JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2916 (NT) of 1980. From the Judgment and Order dated 9.3.1979 of the Bombay High Court in I.T.A. No. 43 to 1979 WITH C.A. Nos. 1194/77, 2978/89, 5535/90 & 1404 of 1991. S.C. Manchanda, S. Rajappa, Ms. A. Subhashini and…