Case Details

Citation(s)
2010 SLG 1852 2010 SLD 1852 (2010) 323 ITR 449
Madras High Court
TAX CASE (APPEAL) No. 118 OF 2009, APRIL 8, 2009
K. RAVIRAJA PANDIAN AND M.M. SUNDRESH, JJ.
K. Ravi for the Appellant J. Naresh Kumar for the
Respondent

Super Spinning Mills Ltd.

v.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Law:

Section:

Section 147 of the Income-tax Act 1961 - Income escaping assessment - General - Assessment year 2000-01 Where once as regards issue of disallowance taken up in reassessment proceedings by Assessing Officer, assessee agreed to remand of issue by Tribunal to Commissioner (Appeals), question as to correctness of reopening of assessment was redundant [In favour of revenue] The Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings and disallowed expenditure on seven categories of machines claimed as revenue expenditure and treated it as capital expenditure. The Tribunal, upon hearing the parties, remitted the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reconsideration of the issue as to whether replacement of the machinery could be regarded as revenue expenditure or capital expenditure in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of CITv. Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills [2007] 294 ITR 328. It also upheld the reopening of assessment. Held that, when it had been accepted before the Tribunal for remittal of the case for fresh adjudication before the Commissioner (Appeals), the question as to the correctness of the reopening was virtually redundant. CASE REFERRED TO CIT v. Ramaraju Surgical Cotton Mills [2007] 294 ITR 328 (SC) (Para 4) K. Ravi for the Appellant J. Naresh Kumar for the Respondent JUDGMENT K. Raviraja Pandian, J.-The assessee by formulating the following questions of law canvassed the correctness of the order of the Tribunal dated July 2, 2008, made in I.T.A. No. 13 of 2005 relating to the assessment year 2000-01. "1.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in upholding the order of the assessment, when in fact the learned Assessing Officer could not have had any reason to believe that the income had escaped assessment ? 2.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in not quashing the order of assessment when the ratios of the decisions of the High Court of Madras were clearly applicable to the instant case ? 3.Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in upholding the order of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492