TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 203
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../2008, the assessee has raised the following grounds:- "1(a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3)/147 dated 27th March, 2006 was bad in law, ab initio void and liable to be struck down. 1(b) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that the Assessing has not satisfied the pre-conditions mentioned in section 147 and 148 of the Act before issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 1(c) That on the facts and in tire circumstances of the case, the CIT(Appeals) erred in upholding tire action of the Assessing officer in making addition/ disallowances on the other issues which were not the subject matter for the initiation of reassessment proceedings. 2(a) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, tire learned CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming 50% of the expenditure disallowed by tire Assessing Officer amounting to Rs. 51,08,050/- incurred on assets not belonging to the company. 2(b) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of the learned CIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee is also benefited and such expenses helps in the business of the assessee. The aforesaid contentions of the assessee has not been controverted by Revenue by placing any materials on record. We further find that the Kolkata Bench of Tribunal in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Integrated Coal Mining Ltd. (supra) after relying on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of L.H. Sugar Factory & Oil Mills (P.) Ltd. (supra) and on similar issue has decided the issue in favour of assessee by observing as under : "10. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the genuineness of expenditure is not doubted by the revenue. Only dispute is that the link road constructed by the assessee belongs to ZillaParishad and for their use. According to the revenue, it is a coincidence that the assessee will use this road for transportation as any other road belonging to the government. We find that assessee had, no doubt, incurred expenditure on up-gradation/construction of link road by making contribution to BurdwanZillaParishad from Barabani Railway station to mines of the assessee at Sarashatali, West Bengal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dition to or expansion of the profit-making apparatus of the assessee. The amount of Rs. 50,000 was contributed by the assessee for the purpose of facilitating the conduct of the business of the assessee and making it more efficient and profitable and it was clearly an expenditure on revenue account." 11. We find that this issue is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of L. H. Sugar Factory & Oils Mills (P) Ltd. (Supra), wherein Hon'ble Apex Court noted that the assessee a sugar manufacturer contributed to the State of Uttar Pradesh a sum of Rs. 50,000/- for construction of a road around its factory for facilitating the transport of sugarcane into the factory and the outflow of manufactured sugar from the factory to the market centres. Contributions were also made for construction of the said road which belonged to the Uttar Pradesh State Government by the Central Government and the State Government equally. The expenditure of Rs. 50,000/- incurred by assessee in that case towards contribution for construction of a road around its factory is an expenditure in the revenue field as it was incurred for the purpose of facilitating the conduct of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....they have submitted the relevant details of ESM companies and the various rates and charges pertaining thereto. This fact was highlighted from the order of Assessing Officer. 9. Per contra, the Ld. DR in support of the findings recorded in earlier order of Tribunal dated 10.05.2019 submitted that the issues, since they have been remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer are technically open for adjudication and it is not only the case of TDS regarding ESM companies but as well as the genuineness of transactions that has to be looked into afresh. For this purpose, the decision of Tribunal remitting the issue back to the file of Assessing Officer, therefore, is correct. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the case records. Before us, the Ld. AR tried to point out the distinctive features in the facts of the year under consideration and that of the earlier year. However, we are of the view that distinct features are not so glaring which would necessitate as to take a different view than the view taken by us in earlier year. That apart the CIT(A) while deciding the issue has also categorically given a finding in the order that the necessary details were no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resent case, the assessee has stated that they have employed ESM companies and have made payment to them and has also deducted TDS and its necessary deposit to the Government account has been completed. The onus is on the assesse to prove these statements. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of LaxminarayanMadanLalVs. CIT (SC) 86 ITR 439 has held that mere existence of agreement between the assessee and its agent does not prove the genuineness of the transactions in a particular case. It all depends on facts and circumstances of each case and the Revenue Authorities is bound to look into the genuineness of the transaction in each of the case. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Goodyear India Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income-Tax reported as 246 ITR 116 has held that even if there is an audit report filed by the assessee that does not prevent the Assessing Officer to ask for relevant documentary evidences and details from the assessee to check the genuineness of the transaction and the entire conduct of the assessee. In the present case before us, when the Assessing Officer called for relevant documentary evidences regarding identity, rate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No.189/JAB/2008 A.Y. 2000-01 14. The ground Nos.1, 3 and 4 raised in ITA No.189/JAB/2008 are similar to the ground No.1 and 4 raised in ITA No.187/JAB/2008. Since, facts and issue are similar, our decision rendered in ITA No.187/JAB/2008 shall apply mutatis mutandis to ITA No.189/JAB/2008 on this issue. Thus, ground Nos.1, 3 and 4 raised by assessee are dismissed. 15. The issue raised in ground No.2 is with regard to disallowance of 25% of expenditure on coal transportation paid to ESM companies. 16. Both the parties fairly admitted that this issue is covered by the decision of Tribunal in assessee‟s own case (supra), which is similar to the ground No.3 raised in ITA No.187/JAB/2008. Therefore, our decision rendered in ITA No.187/JAB/2008 on this issue shall apply mutatis mutandis to the ground No.2 in ITA No.189/JAB/2008. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee in ITA No.189/JAB/2008 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.190/JAB/2008 A.Y. 2001-02 17. The ground No.1 raised in ITA No.190/JAB/2008 is similar to the ground No.1 and 4 raised in ITA No.187/JAB/2008. Since, facts and issue are similar, our decision rendered in ITA No.187/JAB/2008 sha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....revenue expenditure. 1(c) without prejudice to the above grounds No. 1(a) & 1(b), the learned CIT(Appeals) should have directed the Assessing Officer to allow income tax depreciation on such expenditure. 1(d) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in not appreciating that expenses incurred on rehabilitation of people/villagers is revenue in nature and hence allowable. 2(a) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming 50% of the expenditure disallowed by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs. 24,000/- incurred on assets not belonging to the company. 2(b) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of the learned CIT(Appeals) in confirming 50% of the disallowance has no basis whatsoever and the same has been made on an ad-hoc basis. 3(a) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming disallowance upto 25% of the expenditure amounting to Rs. 33,05,75,547/- incurred on coal transportation paid by the company to the ex service men transport companies. 3(b) That on the facts and circu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uring benefit and in that case, it has to be treated as a capital expenditure and not as a revenue expenditure. Further, we observe in assessee's own case in ITA No.18-22/Nag/2001 dated 28.02.2001 wherein this issue was discussed by Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal and observed as follows: "11.7. Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee has relied on the decision of Honble Supreme Court in the case of R.J. Trivedi (supra) wherein the expenditure was incurred by the assessee on fault-stone cutting operation in order to remove the obstruction in the course of mining operation and considering that it was not possible for the assessee to carry on the mining operation without removing the said obstruction, the Honble Apex Court found the said expenditure incurred by the assessee was to facilitate mining activities and, therefore, treated the same as revenue in nature. In the present, case there was no such obstruction in carrying on the mining operation of the assessee and the expenditure was incurred by the assessee to relocate and rehabilitate the villages in order to acquire a right to possession in the leasehold land to facilitate the enjoyment of surface right....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld and therefore the same is distinguishable from the case of Madras Auto Service (P) Ltd. as well as that of Associated Cement Companies Ltd. Further in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. v. CIT (supra) the Honble Supreme Court observed that if the advantage merely consists of facilitating the assessees trading operation or enabling the management and conduct of the assessees business more efficiently or more profitably while leaving fixed capital untouched, the expenditure would be of revenue nature even though the advantage may endure for a indefinite future. In the present case, the assessee has acquired an interest in the immovable property in the form of surface rights and right to possession in respect of leasehold land and the same being not merely to facilitate the assessees business operation but being in the nature of acquisition of substantive right in the immovable property for enduring advantage, the ratio laid down by the Honble Apex Court in the case of Empire Jute Co. Ltd. cannot be said to have any application in the assessees case. Similarly, the case of Plantation Corporation of Kerala v. Commr.Agrl. IT (supra) is also distinguishable on the similar line. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the case of N. Peer Sahib v. CIT (supra) in respect of which the learned counsel for the assessee has contended that the lease amounts having been paid to the surface owners by the assessee therein for extracting iron coal at the beginning of the mining operation, it was considered as capital in nature whereas in the present case the assessee has made the relevant payments during the currency of the lease period. After carefully perusing the said decision of Honble Mysore High Court, it however, appears that the payment made to the Pattedars who were occupying rights over the land which had been acquired by the assessee from the government was found to be of the same character as the payments to the government for acquiring the mining lease and keeping in view this character of the payment, the Honble Mysore High Court held the same to be a capital expenditure. In the case of Chloride India Ltd. v. CIT (supra) relied upon by the revenue, the assessee had paid the money for buying out tile tenancy right and, therefore, it was held by the Honble Calcutta High Court that the amount so paid for acquiring the possession which was a benefit of enduring nature, is a capital expenditure.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iring surface rights as well as the right to possession in respect of leasehold land for enduring period was a capital expenditure and the learned Commissioner (Appeals) was fully justified in upholding the action of the assessing officer in treating the same as capital expenditure and thereby disallowing the deduction claimed by the assessee in respect of the same. 11.9. In the case of Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT (supra) relied upon by the revenue, the Honble Apex Court observed that the aim and object of the expenditure would determine the character of expenditure whether it is a capital or revenue and the source or the manner of payment would then be of no consequence. In the present case, the expenditure was incurred by the assessee-company with aim and object to acquire the surface rights as well as the right to possession in respect of the leasehold land for a long period and, therefore, the nature of such expenditure was certainly of capital nature. The revenue has also relied on the decision of Honble Mysore High Court in the case of N. Peer Sahib v. CIT (supra) in respect of which the learned counsel for the assessee has contended that the lease amounts ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....otally different from the facts involved in the case of Bikaner Gypsums Ltd. inasmuch as in the latter case the expenditure was incurred by the assessee for the removal of a restriction which was obstructing his business operation of mining within a particular area. We have already observed that the existence of village was not obstructing the mining operations of the assessee-company and the expenditure in question was incurred to acquire the right to possession in respect of the leasehold land to facilitate the enjoyment of surface rights. Moreover, as the said acquisition resulted into accrual of enduring benefits to the assessee-company for the balance period of lease, the same has to be treated as capital expenditure, as held by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Assam Bengal Cement Co. Ltd. v. CIT (supra). As such, considering all the facts of the case and legal position enumerating from the judicial pronouncements discussed hereinabove, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned expenditure incurred by the assessee for acquiring surface rights as well as the right to possession in respect of leasehold land for enduring period was a capital expenditure and the le....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onal ground as ground No.1E which is as follows: "1E.Without prejudice to our contention that the deduction is a revenue expenditure allowable fully in AY.2004-05, in view of the decision of Honble ITAT Cuttack in East India Minerals Limited Vs. JCIT (ITA No.224/CTK/2012, the assessee company should be permitted to claim the said expenditure over the limited period of the lease of land for mining." 28. With regard to this additional ground No.1E, the Ld. AR of the assessee has placed reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal Cuttack in the case of East India Minerals Limited Vs. JCIT (ITA No.224/CTK/2012) wherein the Cuttack Bench of the Tribunal has held as under: "7. We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we uphold the contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee for the simple reason that the denial of claim of depreciation has been made on misinterpretation of law and the applicability thereof. Explanation to Section 32(1)(ii) leans in favour of the assessee to the extent that it is the actual action of put to use whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts and issues are common, our decision rendered in ITA No.173/JAB/2008 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the appeal in ITA No.174/JAB/2008. 32. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No.174/JAB/2008 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.175/JAB/2008 A.Y.2006-07 33. The parties herein fairly admitted that all the issues raised in this appeal including the additional ground are similar and identical to the issues raised in ITA No.173/JAB/2008. Since the facts and issues are common, our decision rendered in ITA No.173/JAB/2008 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the appeal in ITA No.175/JAB/2008. 34. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No.175/JAB/2008 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.05/BLPR/2012 A.Y.2008-09 35. The issue raised in ground No.1 of this appeal is similar to the issue raised in ground No.1 in ITA No.173/JAB/2008. Since the facts and issues are common, our decision rendered in ITA No.173/JAB/2008 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the issue raised in ground No.1 in ITA No.05/BLPR/2012. Thus, the ground No.1 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 36. The issue raised in ground No.2 in this appeal is similar to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....so given considerable thought to the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is fair and reasonable in restricting the addition to the extent of Rs. 2.10 Lacs as the assessee company has failed to file the requisite details regarding their claim to that extent. Hence, we uphold the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) and the same does not require any interference. Thus, ground No.4 raised in appeal by the assessee is dismissed. 42. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No.05/BLPR/2012 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.21/BLPR/2012( By Revenue) A.Y.2006-07 43. In ITA No.21/BLPR/2012, the Revenue has raised following grounds in appeal:- 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and in fact in allowing the relief of Rs. 2,56,03,757/- out of total interest withdrawn amounting to Rs. 3,71,78,138/- which has been withdrawn by the A.O. keeping in view that as per the provision u/s.244A of the Act, no interest shall be payable if the amount of refund is less than 10% of the tax as determined under sub section (1) of the section 115WE or sub section (1) of section 143(3) or on re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder being erroneous, perverse and contrary to the facts on record, the same may be reversed while that of the AO be restored. 5. That the appellant Assessing Officer reserves the right to amend, modify or add any of the grounds of appeal preferred. 44. The crux of the grievance of the Revenue is against the relief of Rs. 2,56,03,757/- granted out of total interest withdrawn amounting to Rs. 3,71,78,138/- which has been withdrawn by the Assessing Officer keeping in view that as per provisions of Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred to as "the Act‟), no interest shall be payable if the amount of refund is less than 10% of the tax as determined sub section (1) of Section 115WE or sub section (1) of Section 143(3) or on regular assessment. 45. The brief facts on the issue are that the Assessing Officer observed that as per provisions of Section 244A of the Act, no interest shall be payable if the amount of refund is less than 10% of the tax as determined under sub section (1) of Section 115WE or sub section (1) of Section 143(3) or on regular assessment. Accordingly, the interest so allowed has been withdrawn by the Assessing Officer vid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....educed accordingly. The assessed income was substantially reduced at the appellate stage but it is more than the income returned. In the given fact and circumstances of the case and keeping in view of the above provisions under the Act, I find that whatever the interest u/s.244A of the Act due to the appellant, u/s.143(1) of the Act ought to be reduced from the interest on refund granted to the appellant company after determination of income by the appellate authorities. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, the additional ground of appeal filed by the Ld. AR is found to be bonafide and relevant to decide the issue in hand and hence, admitted. The computation of interest ought to be called back or withdrawn as per provision u/s.234D, as submitted by the Ld. AR, was referred to the AO for further verification vide this office letter No. CIT(A)/BSP/RR/11-12/131 dated 14.11.2011 and the AO in his report dated 29.11.2011 has agreed to the argument of the Ld. AR on principle but pointed out certain mistakes furnished by the Ld. AR. He computed interest on refund to be called back at Rs. 1,15,74,341/- as against Rs. 1,02,02,000/- computed by the Ld. AR. The above rep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed from the interest on refund granted to the assessee company after determination of income by the appellate authorities. We find that on perusal of material available on record, the excess claim of interest to the extent of Rs. 1,15,74,341/- is required to be called back u/s.234D of the Act only, but not the withdrawal of entire interest of Rs. 3,71,78,138/- granted u/s.244A of the Act. Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is well reasoned and the same does not call for any interference. Thus, grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 48. In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA No.21/BLPR/2012 is dismissed. ITA No.03/BLPR/2012 A.Y. 2008-09 49. In ITA No.03/BLPR/2012, the Revenue has raised the following grounds: "1(a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and in fact in deleting the addition which expenditure amounting to Rs. 732.98 Lakhs in spite of the facts on record that no admissible materials were produced before the AO to substantiate the claim. (b) That in reaching the aforesaid decision, the learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that both the meticulous findings of the AO as well as th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has been made by disallowing the expenditure incurred on reimbursement of LPG Cylinders to the employees in spite of the facts on records that during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee company could not explain the admissibility of the claim. 6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) is not justified in restricting the disallowance from Rs. 397.63 Lakhs to Rs. 198.81 Lakhs made by the AO towards assessee's claim of expenditure on assets belonging to the government. 7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and in fact in deleting the addition amounting to Rs. 1070.61 Lakhs which have been made by disallowing the expenditure on plantation of trees and reclamation of land respectively, in spite of the facts on records that the above expenditure is a capital expenditure because the expenditure incurred under the above heads endure a permanent benefit to the assessee. 8.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and in fact in deleting the addition amounting to Rs. 5801.76 Lakhs out of the total disallowance of Rs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by Assessing Officer. He thus supported the order of Assessing Officer. 53. The Ld. AR on the other hand supported the order of CIT(A). 54. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. We find that the issue of allowance of expenditure towards Community Development is squarely covered by the decision of Nagpur Bench of Tribunal in the case of South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Vs. JCIT in ITA Nos.18 to 22/Nag/2001, for assessment years 1989-90, 1990-91, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97, order dated 28.02.2002. The Tribunal has deliberated on this issue vide paras 18.1 to 18.6 and decided the issue in favour of assessee by holding as under: "18.4. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material on record, We have also gone through the various case laws cited by the learned representatives of both, the sides. It is observed that the expenditure incurred by the assessee-company for providing basic amenities like road widening, street lighting, better drinking water facilities, etc. for the residential areas in and around the company's area of operations in which mainly the wor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to this issue also. Thus,the ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 58. The issue raised in ground No.3 relates to expenditure towards social overheads. 59. Brief facts relating to the issue are that the assessee had claimed expenses on power & fuel at Rs. 12646.29 lakhs. It was noted by Assessing Officer that assessee had common electric meter from which electricity was utilized for business purposes and also for the personal use of the employees. The assessee was therefore asked to explain as to why 50% of the expenses not be disallowed. The submissions made by the assessee were not found acceptable to Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer noted that no details were furnished by assessee as to the mode of recovery of electricity charges from employees. He also noted that the details with reference to the type of quarters, electric points in each type of quarters, rate of electricity per unit charged by CSEB and recovery from the employees were furnished by assessee. The Assessing Officer therefore, after considering the reply of assesseehad disallowed 50% of said expenses. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dingly. Thus, the ground No.3 raised by Revenue is partly allowed. 63. Ground No.4 relates to the disallowance towards expenditure incurred on grant to schools and educational institutions. 64. The brief facts on the issue are that the assessee company has debited expenses on account of grant to schools and institutions at Rs. 1135.86 Lakhs. The submission of the assessee in this regard has been depicted in the assessment order. The Assessing Officer noticed that the disallowance on this issue was made in respect of other subsidiaries of Coal India Ltd and expenses on education can be allowed to the extent of reimbursement of tuition fees of the students who are children of the assessee‟s employees only. Further the Assessing Officer observed that as regard the assessee‟s contention that the first Appellate Authority has allowed the claim of the assessee is concerned, he observed that the order of First Appellate Authority has not been accepted by the Department and has preferred appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on this issue. He noted that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the departmental appeal merely on the technical ground that the Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot benefit the employees in any manner. In the instant case, reading of the trust deed would clearly reveal that the beneficiaries of the trust are the assessee's employees. Hence, having regard to the legislature intention in introducing the said section and the fact that the contribution constituted employees welfare measures as well as with such contribution made pursuant to an agreement with the employees is a requirement under the Industrial Dispute Act violation of which would result in penalty to the defaulter, an assessee is entitled for the allowance of the relief asked for." As a matter of fact, the impugned expenditure on account of contribution to various schools was not incurred by the assessee-company voluntarily but the same was incurred to discharge it's obligation in terms of a National Coal Wage Agreement entered with the employees and as the said agreement was enforceable in law under the Indian Contract Act as well as the Industrial Dispute Act, the assessee-company was under a statutory obligation to incur the said expenditure. As such, considering all the facts of the case and keeping in view the aforesaid decisions including the decision of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..........On careful consideration of the submission made by the Ld. AR and having regard to the fact that the appellant company has claimed to have treated the reimbursement of expenditure on account of the provision of LPG to the employees as perquisite and has been deducting income tax thereon, the AO's action is disallowing the above expenditure is not justified. Hence, the same is deleted. However, the AO is directed to verify the contentions of the appellant company regarding the computation of perquisite value in respect of the above expenditure and deduction of tax thereon and take necessary action for any, omission, if any, found in this regard." 71. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 72. The Ld. AR apart from reiterating its submissions before lower authorities and supporting the order of CIT(A) further submitted that National Coal Wage Agreement entitles employees to get free issue of coal for domestic use only subject to quantity limitation. For a cleaner environment, many employees have opted to use LPG Cylinders in lieu of free issue of coal and accordingly the same is reimbursed to the employees subject to certain regulat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ordingly, disallowed the same. The CIT(A) in its order has deleted by stating it as revenue expenditure.Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us. 79. Before us, the Ld. DR placed reliance on the order of Assessing Officer. 80. Per contra, the Ld. AR apart from supporting the order of CIT(A) also relied on the following decisions:- (i) CIT Vs. Malayalam Plantation Ltd. (1964) 53 ITR 140 (SC) (ii) CIT Vs. Gogte Minerals (1996) 220 ITR 29 (Kar) (iii) Smt. K. SuryakumariVenu Vs. ACIT (2016) 70 taxmann.com 310 81. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. We find that the Assessing Officer has disallowed the expenditure incurred by the assessee on account of "tree plantation expenses‟ and "others‟ to be capital in nature, whereas the CIT(A) relying on the orders of his predecessors has deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by stating it as revenue expenditure. We find that this issue is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Malayalam Plantation Ltd. (supra),CIT Vs. Gogte Minerals (supra) and Smt. K. SuryakumariVenu Vs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deliberated on the issue vide paras 27 to 41 of its order and allowed the claim of assessee by holding that the same is business expenditure. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are as under:- "40. We are unable to find any legally sustainable merits in this objection either. The criterion on the basis which call is taken as to be whether a mine can be treated as a development mine or as a revenue mine is, as we have noted in paragraph 22 earlier in this order, is uniform all along not only in this case of this assessee but in the case of other similarly placed assessees, and the revenue authorities have accepted that criterion all along. It is a purely a factual matter which permeates through different assessment years, and for the detailed reasons discussed earlier, there is no good reason to disturb this criterion. In any case, the authorities below have neither suggested any alternative criterion, which will be appropriate on the facts of this case, nor have they have demonstrated that the facts implicit in their stand actually exist. As a matter of fact, the apprehensions of the Assessing Officer seem to be purely hypothetical and in the realm of conjectures and sur....