TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 331
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7.1, 27.2 and 27.3. 3. It is further brought to our notice that the very decision of this court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Torrent Power Limited reported at (2013) 263 CTR 683 (Guj.) equivalent to (2013) 29 taxmann.com 405 (Gujarat) came to be considered by this court in Tax Appeal No.752 of 2012 decided on March 20, 2013 and this court held in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. We find that the question is already covered by the above referred two decisions of this court in case of Torrent Power Limited (supra) as well as in case of Cadila Healthcare Limited (supra). Hence, no question of law would arise for consideration in the present appeal as canvassed. 4. On question (B), the discussion by the Tribunal is at para No.28, which reads as under: "28. Ground 3 is against in restricting the disallowance of interest to average cost of fund @ 4% instead of average rate of borrowing @ 7.25%, thereby reducing allowance of Rs. 13,86,585/-. This issue has been decided by us in favour of assessee as per findings contained in para 13 & 13.1 of this order in assessee' appeal, i.e. ITA No.1146/Ahd/2011 (supra), therefore, this ground of Revenue's appeal is dismis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Respectfully following the judgement of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Cadila Healthcare Ltd.(supra), we hereby direct the AO to allow the claim of the assessee. Thus, this ground of assessee's appeal is allowed. 4. The aforesaid shows that the Tribunal for allowing this particular ground/question in favour of the Assessee, has relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of CIT vs. Cadila Healthcare Limited, reported in (2013) 31 Taxmann.com 300 (Gujarat) . We find that as the question is already covered by the said decision of this Court, such question "A" would not arise being substantial question of law to be considered in the present appeal, as canvassed. 5. On question (B), discussions by the Tribunal are from paragraphs 12, 12.1, 13 and 13.1, which is reproduced herein below:- 12. Ground No.6 is against the dis-allowance of interest amounting to Rs. 17,06,566/-. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the AO made dis-allowance of interest on the basis that the interest free- loans/advances given by the assessee to its sister-concern, namely, M/s.Casil Health Products Ltd. (CHPL). The AO made addition of Rs. 30,93,151/- as compared to, in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pplied and secondly, the assessee was having sufficient interest-free funds to make advances. The judgement relied upon by the ld.counsel for the assessee in the case of CIT vs. Raghuvir Synthetics Ltd. (supra), wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat relying on the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S.A.Builders Ltd. vs. CIT reported in (2007) 288 ITR 01 (SC) answered the question in favour of assessee. In the present case, both the authorities have made addition on the basis that the advances given have been continuing for a long period of time. Both the authorities have not given any finding with regard to availability of funds with the assessee for making such advances. However, the contention of the assessee is that the fact is not controverted by the authorities below that the advances have been given for business purposes since the assessee has been making purchases and getting job-work from the associate-concern. This goes to prove that advances were given for business purpose. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by following the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of S.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e placed reliance on the judgement of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of ACIT vs. Ashima Syntex Ltd. reported at 251 ITR 133 . He submitted that the details were given with regard to installation of the machinery as well as the commencement of the production by producing electricity power consumption bill, registration of excise, etc. He submitted that the authorities below failed to appreciate the fact that it was not necessary that the production so made should be sold, in fact the assessee had furnished evidence of commencement of the production. He submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the judgement of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of ACIT vs. Ashima Syntex Ltd.(supra). On the contrary, ld.Sr.DR supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that the assessee should have given the cogent evidence regarding usage of the plant purchased from Pfizer Ltd. and also production so made. 17. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below as well as the judgement relied upon by the ld.counsel for the assessee. The authorities below have not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e optimum production for granting the benefit. Law only required that there must be use of plant and machinery for the purpose of business. Use of such words that plant and machinery was run more extensively or was required to be used for larger production, is not to be found in the Act or Rules. Whether the plant and machinery were upto the extent of its efficiency is irrelevant for the purpose of deciding depreciation. The test is that building, plant and machinery are used for the purpose of business. It is not even necessary that in a year it must have been used for a particular number of days. If the intention of the legislature was that if the plant and machinery is used for a particular number of days, only then one is entitled to get the benefit of depreciation, legislature would have made that provision. Earlier, rules were to the aforesaid extent. Even recently, with regard to depreciation of vehicles, law is made clear. Therefore, it is for the legislature to make a provision in that regard. Unless and until that provision is made, plant, machinery and building used for the purpose of business in a particular year irrespective of number of days for which it worked, and i....