2019 (6) TMI 1299

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 20.06.2005 for the assessment years 1994-95, 1995-96. 2.The above Tax Case Appeals have been admitted on the following substantial question of law:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that expenditure on replacement of old machinery by purchase and installation of new machinery was allowable as revenue expenditure?" 3.We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani for the appellant/Revenue. 4. Though the respondent has been served and their name is printed in the cause list, none appeared on its behalf. An identical substantial question of law framed for consideration in these appeals were sub....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....out of the aforesaid revenue expenditure claimed by the respondent on the ground that it related to installation of the above machinery and is in the nature of outlay of capital expenditure. 4. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent-assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals vide order dated 29th September, 1983 allowed Rs. 26,84,235/- as admissible revenue expenditure and at the same time directed the assessing officer to withdraw the depreciation and development rebate granted on these capitalized items, as they have been treated as revenue expenditure. 5. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income Tax Appellate Trib....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on cannot be granted under Section 31(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Saravana Spg.Mills(P.) Ltd., (supra) this Court has held that in a textile mill there are several department/divisions. In each department/division there are several machines and perform different functions. Therefore, when each of the department/division perform different functions, repair/ substitution of an old machine will not come within the definition of the word "current repairs" and deduction cannot be claimed thereunder. 9. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned judgement and order passed by the Gujarat High Court as also the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax A....