TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (8) TMI 153
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....convertible debentures had to be allowed as deduction?" I.T.A. Nos. 1553 and 1919/Mds/94, 2676 and 43 to 47/Mds/96 for the assessment years 1986-87 to 1988-89, 1992-93, 1993-94: "2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the mamool paid at harbour, customs airport is to be allowed as a deduction?" I. T. A. Nos. 1553, 1919, 1612, 1922/Mds/94, 2657/Mds/95, 2656 and 2657/Mds/95,43 to 47/Mds/96 for the assessment years 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93, 1989-90, 1992-93, 1986-87 to 1988-89, 1992-93: "3. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment of incentives to Dock Labour Board workers had to be allowed as a deduction?" I. T. A. Nos. 43 and 45/Mds/96 for the assessment years 1986-87 and 1988-89: "4. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the claim of the loss from the films division had to be allowed?" I. T. A. Nos. 1612 and 1922/Mds/94, 2657/Mds/95, 2600/Mds/96 for the assessment years 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93, and 1993-94: "5. Whether, on the facts and c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mption of the debenture, the holders of the debentures were entitled to certain shares. The issue of shares is a future event which mayor may not happen. At present, the expenditure incurred was on the issue of debentures only and hence the expenses incurred on obtaining a loan is a revenue expenditure. We accordingly uphold the claim of the assessee." 3.3. The Assessing Officer had bifurcated the expenditure and allowed only 40 per cent. as revenue expenditure, without any basis. The Tribunal correctly held that the disallowance of 60 per cent. is without any basis and the Assessing Officer was wrong in treating part of the expenditure as capital expenditure on the reasoning that at the time of redemption of debentures, the holders of the debentures would be entitled to certain shares. The issue of shares is a future event which mayor may not happen. 3.4. The Tribunal considered and followed the principles enunciated in the apex court judgment reported in India Cements Ltd. v. CIT [1966] 60 ITR 52, which, in fact, followed by the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Thirani Chemicals Ltd. [2007] 290 ITR 196 holding that expenditure incurred on the issue of debentures is a permissible ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e reframing question No.2 as, "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the expenses incurred paid at harbour, customs, airport is to be allowed as a deduction?" We still hold that no substantial question of law arises as the expenses incurred by the assessee in this regard are nothing but an inevitable expenditure as factually found by the Tribunal. Hence, finding no substantial question of law that arises for consideration, the appeal as regards question No.2 is also dismissed. Question No. 3: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment of incentives to Dock Labour Board workers had to be allowed as a deduction?" 5.1. This question pertains to the assessment years 1986-87 to 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92 and 1992-93. The assessee paid incentives to Dock Labour Board workers, share handling workers, tally clerks and lorry drivers. The said amount was paid to the workers as incentives to speed up the stevedoring work carried on by the assessee. The stevedoring is one of the business activities of the assessee-company which is a registered e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lm distribution and the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim on the ground that the assessee's venture into the film distribution business is only to avoid payment of taxes due to Government, legitimately. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order, the Revenue filed an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal by following its earlier order of the assessee's own case relating to the earlier assessment years. 6.2. The Tribunal has consistently allowed the claim for loss from films division. The Revenue has accepted the earlier order and counsel for the Revenue has not produced any material or evidence before us to take a different view. When a consistent view has been taken by the Tribunal, there is no error or infirmity in the order of the Tribunal and it does not require interference and hence, no substantial question of law arises for consideration of this court and hence, the appeal in respect of question No.4 is dismissed. Question No.5: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. Aggrieved, the Revenue filed an appeal to the Tribunal and the Tribunal dismissed the appeal. 8.2. In respect of the earlier assessment order, for the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83, the Tribunal had allowed the claim of the assessee. In the present case, the Tribunal followed the said earlier order and allowed the claim of the assessee. The Revenue was also not able to produce evidence or material to take a different view and the said earlier order was accepted by the Revenue. In view of the same, no substantial question of law arises for consideration of this court and hence, the appeal apropos question No.6 is dismissed. Question No.7: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that interest paid towards the loan taken for acquiring Spic zero bonds, had to be allowed as a deduction while computing the income from other sources?" 9.1. This question pertains to the assessment year 1993-94. During the relevant years, the assessee had acquired Spic zero bonds from M/s. Spic Limited. The assessee has claimed interest payment as a deductible expenditure. The reasons for the ....