https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298070 The Supreme Court remitted the issue of machinery replacement back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The replacement of machinery was not considered as revenue expenditure, except for a partial amount for a specific item in 2008-09. The Tribunal upheld that the expenditure for machinery replacement could not be allowed as revenue outgo. Regarding the disallowance under section 14A for 2008-09, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration as the satisfaction regarding expenditure for earning exempt income was not recorded. The appeal for 2005-06 was dismissed, while the appeal for 2008-09 was partly allowed for statistical purposes. en-us Thu, 09 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Oct 2021 16:07:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298070 The Supreme Court remitted the issue of machinery replacement back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The replacement of machinery was not considered as revenue expenditure, except for a partial amount for a specific item in 2008-09. The Tribunal upheld that the expenditure for machinery replacement could not be allowed as revenue outgo. Regarding the disallowance under section 14A for 2008-09, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration as the satisfaction regarding expenditure for earning exempt income was not recorded. The appeal for 2005-06 was dismissed, while the appeal for 2008-09 was partly allowed for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 09 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298070