TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (2) TMI 100
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yarn. For the assessment years 1993-94, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1995-96, the Assessing Officer, disallowed the claim of the assessee in respect of replacement of old machinery by new one on the ground that the same cannot be treated as a revenue expenditure; treated the Modvat credit relating to the replacement of machinery as capital; recalculated the benefit under section 80HHC by including the excise duty and sales tax to the total turnover and also disallowed the excess remuneration paid to the director. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed appeals before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), allowed the above issues in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed counsel appearing for the Revenue that the issue involved in question No. 1 in T. C. Nos. 58 and 59 of 2006, is covered by the decision of this court rendered in CIT v. Janakiram Mills Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 403, the issue involved in question No. 2 is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. [2003] 261 ITR 275 and the third question is covered by the decision of this court rendered in CIT v. Wheels India Ltd. [2005] 275 ITR 319. With regard to the first question, whether the replacement of machinery is capital or revenue is not determined by the treatment given in the books of account or in the balance-sheet. The claim has to be determined only by the provisions of the Act and not by the acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o income which was liable to be taxed under the Act; income was not generated to the extent of the Modvat credit on unconsumed raw material. Hence, the second question in T.C. Nos. 58 and 59 of 2006 is answered against the Revenue. With respect to the third question in T.C. Nos. 58 and 59 of 2006, viz., whether the excise duty and sales tax should be excluded from the total turnover for the purpose of deduction under section 80HHC, the Tribunal, following the decision rendered by this court in CIT v. Madras Motors Ltd./M.M. Forgings Ltd. [2002] 257 ITR 60 confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the excise duty and sales tax from the total turnover. This court in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs.6,08,250 3,00,000 3,08,250 Shri L.S. Prabhakaran Rs.6,08,250 3,00,000 3,08,250 Smt. Shanthi Manivannan Rs.6,08,250 1,02,000 5,06,250 Smt. Usha Devi Rs.6,08,250 1,02,000 5,06,250 The Assessing Officer disallowed a sum of Rs. 16,29,000 out of the total payment of remuneration to the directors. Aggrieved by that order, the assessee filed appeals to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who, after looking into the issues, has come to the conclusion that the salary paid to the lady directors was excessive dictated by non-business consideration. Accordingly, he had given directions that monthly salary of Rs. 15,000 would be a reasonable proposition in view of the services th....