TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court affirms Tribunal's decision in favor of assessee on customs duty & interest payment issues</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus CARBORANDUM UNIVERSAL LTD.</h3> COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus CARBORANDUM UNIVERSAL LTD. - [2006] 205 CTR 498 Issues:1. Deletion of addition towards customs duty on closing stock2. Allowability of interest paid on borrowed capital as revenue expenditureAnalysis:Issue 1: Deletion of addition towards customs duty on closing stockThe case involved an appeal by the Revenue against the Tribunal's order deleting the addition towards the element of customs duty on the closing stock. The Revenue contended that the customs duty should have been included in the value of the closing stock. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, citing the decision in CIT vs. English Electric Co. of India Ltd., where a similar issue was decided against the Revenue. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the order was in conformity with the law, and no substantial questions of law arose for consideration.Issue 2: Allowability of interest paid on borrowed capital as revenue expenditureThe second issue revolved around the allowability of interest paid on borrowed capital as revenue expenditure. The assessee had borrowed funds for the purpose of expanding projects and claimed deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The section allows deduction for interest paid on capital borrowed for business purposes. Both the CIT(A) and the Tribunal had found that the conditions specified under the section were met in this case - the money was borrowed for business expansion, and interest was paid on the borrowed capital. Therefore, the claim of the assessee under section 36(1)(iii) was deemed to be in conformity with the law. The High Court, based on this finding, upheld the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the tax cases, concluding that there was no error or infirmity in the Tribunal's order.In summary, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee on both issues, stating that the orders were in conformity with the law. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
TaxTMI 