TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (12) TMI 194
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (Rs.) --------------------------------------------------------- 1. Paid to sales-tax authorities against penalty 100 imposed by them under s. 36(4A) --------------------------------------------------------- 2. Paid to Consumer Forum against the notice 3,050 issued by Kakinada Consumer Redressal Forum --------------------------------------------------------- 3. Paid to Dy. Inspector of Registration & Dy. 21,810 Controller of Stamps for non-compliance of stamping to be done in H.P Agreement with hirers --------------------------------------------------------- Total &nb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(A) held that the cl. (b) of s. 43B did apply to the ESI contributions. The learned Authorised Representative could not give any cogent reason why we should take a different view. However, we find that his alternative plea is covered by the decision of the Tribunal Pune in the case of Star Rewinders and Electricals, Raigad vs. ITO (ITA No. 1343/Pune/2003) for asst. yr. 2001-02, dt. 23rd July, 2004 relying on their earlier order in the case of Indian Card Clothing Co. Ltd. (ITA No. 214/Pune/1998). The Tribunal held as under: "(i) The s. 43B would apply only to employers contribution while the deduction in respect of employees contribution would be governed by the provisions of s. 36(1)(va); (ii) The deduction in respect of employers contribution is to be allowed, if the payment has been made by the assessee before the due date of filing of return prescribed in his case. (iii) in case of employees contribution, the deduction is to be allowed if the payment is made within the grace period of the due date as specified in s. 36(1)(va). 9. We respectfully follow the precedent and remit this matter back to the file of the AO for being examined in the light of the decision of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d which was claimed under s. 37(1) of the Act. The details are as under: ------------------------------------------------------------ S. Particulars Amount No. (Rs.) ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. Managers to Issue Fees-Hongkong and Shanghai 12,00,000 ------------------------------------------------------------ 2. Managers to the Issue Fees-Kotak Mahindra 12,00,000 ------------------------------------------------------------ 3. Brokerage and Undertaking Commission 1,06,13,147 --------------------....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 141 CTR (SC) 387. 12. We find that the issue, raised through ground No. 5.1, whether the expenses aggregating to Rs. 2,55,07,817 have to be treated as expenses of revenue nature or of capital nature, is covered against the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal Pune in the assessee's own case in ITA No. 33/Pune/1998 for asst. yr. 1994-95, dt. 17th May, 2004. The Tribunal observed in paras 6 and 7 of its order as under: "6. We find that in the case of Brooke Bond India Ltd., the question that was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by the Supreme Court was as under: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in sustaining the disallowance of Rs. 13,99,305 being expenses incurred in connection with the issue of fresh lot of shares in 1967." 7. It is also seen that the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. was referred to by the Supreme Court in their judgment in the case of Brooke Bond India Ltd. The details of expenses of Rs. 3,35,813 are reproduced in para 4 above. In our opinion, all the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (1997) 141 CTR 387 (SC), (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC) after taking into consideration the provisions of the IT Act 1961. the interpretation of the term 'income' given in a large number of decisions of the High Courts, the Privy council and of the apex Court observed that income attracts tax as soon as it accrues, that the application or the destination of the income has nothing to do with its accrual or taxability, that an interest receipt is always of revenue nature unless it is received by way of damages or compensation. The question that was referred by the Tribunal to the Supreme Court for decision, in two parts, was as under: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, interest derived by the assessee from the borrowed funds which were invested in short-term deposits with banks would be chargeable to tax under the head 'Income from other sources' or would go to reduce the interest payable by the assessee on the term loans secured by the assessee from financial institutions, which would be capitalised after commencement of commercial production." 14.4 The Supreme Court answered the first part of the question in the affirmative and the second part of the quest....