2019 (2) TMI 172

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e expenditure. Therefore, the petitioner did not pay advance tax thereon. In fact, during the relevant time, the legal position that obtained was that such expenditure was to be characterised only as revenue expenditure. The Hon'ble Division Bench of the Madras High Court in decision reported in (1981) 129 ITR 12(Mad) (Commissioner of Income Tax, Coimbatore vs. Kasturi Mills Ltd) held as follows : "The following question is sought to be referred in this matter : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the sum of Rs. 6,53,463 representing the cost of modernisation of the mills' machinery can be said to be in the nature of revenue expenditur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....araju Surgical Cotton Mills (294 ITR 328 (SC) on 21.08.2017.  As a result, the demand under Section 234 B of the Income Tax Act got restored in the case of the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petitioner can no longer contend that the expenditure incurred in modernising their mill is not chargeable to income tax. But then, the petitioner seeks waiver of interest for non payment of advance tax in this regard. The petitioner submitted an undated application to the respondent. The petitioner also submitted written submissions on 11.08.2010, 18.07.2011 and on 26.05.2018. The request of the writ petitioner stood rejected vide letter dated 18.07.2018 passed by the respondent. The same is assailed in this writ petition. 3.The learned ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ch of the jurisdictional High Court (which was not challenged before the Supreme Court and has become final), in any assessment or reassessment proceedings the advance tax paid by the assessee during such financial year is found to be less than the amount of advance tax payable on his current income, and the assessee is chargeable to interest under Section 234 B or Section 234 C and the Chief Commissioner / Director  General is satisfied that this is a fit case for reduction or waiver of such interest." 5.Now, what has to be seen is whether during the relevant time, the expenditure incurred by the petitioner was to be classified as revenue expenditure by any decision of the jurisdictional high court. The learned counsel for the writ....