Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for the purpose of wear and tear allowance under Rule 6 of the Rules of Cases I and II of the Income Tax Act, 1918, grants or reimbursements received by the assessee reduce the 'actual cost to the person' of the plant or tramway track.
Analysis: The allowance was computed on the basis of the expenditure actually incurred on the tramway tracks. The phrase 'actual cost to the person' was construed as referring to the real cost of the asset to the person carrying on the trade, namely the amount expended by that person on the construction or acquisition of the plant. The source from which the money was obtained, or whether part of the expenditure was later recouped by a third party or by a public grant, did not alter the actual cost. The expression was read as excluding any deduction merely because the assessee had received money from another source to meet or reimburse the expenditure.
Conclusion: Grants and reimbursements did not reduce the 'actual cost to the person' for wear and tear allowance, and the appeal succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to compute the allowance on the full expenditure incurred on the tramway tracks without deducting the amounts later received by way of contribution or grant.
Ratio Decidendi: For wear and tear allowance, 'actual cost to the person' means the expenditure actually incurred by the taxpayer on the asset, unaffected by subsequent recoupment or the source of funds.