https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68430 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on the disallowance of PPF and ESI payments and site development expenses, while remanding the issue of machinery repairs for further assessment. The disallowance of PPF and ESI payments was deemed unjustified as the liability was taken over by the assessee, entitling them to the deduction. The site development expenses were found not to be capital in nature, leading to their deletion. However, the matter of machinery repairs related to loom conversion lacked clarity, prompting a remand for additional scrutiny by the AO. en-us Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Mar 2011 19:01:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68430 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on the disallowance of PPF and ESI payments and site development expenses, while remanding the issue of machinery repairs for further assessment. The disallowance of PPF and ESI payments was deemed unjustified as the liability was taken over by the assessee, entitling them to the deduction. The site development expenses were found not to be capital in nature, leading to their deletion. However, the matter of machinery repairs related to loom conversion lacked clarity, prompting a remand for additional scrutiny by the AO. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68430