2012 (9) TMI 1187

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No.199/2010-11 dated 31.01.2012 and in ITA No.CIT(A)-V/ITA No.229/2010-11 dated 31.01.2012 for the Asst. Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 respectively. The relevant proceedings are under sec.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short 'the Act' . 2. We have gone through the Revenue's grounds in all the appeals. It emerges that almost all the issues are covered by various decisions of ITAT, Chennai. Still further, we deem it appropriate to reproduce the relevant pleadings in grounds made by the Revenue in all appeals as under :- a) ITA No.895/Mds/2012 A.Y. 2005-06 : 1. The order of learned CIT(Appeals) is contrary to law and facts of the case. 2.1 The ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in deleting the di....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Id. CIT(A) relied on the orders of the Hon'ble ITAT in the assessee's own case in ITA NO.3321 Mds/2008 dt. 13.06.2008. 3.3 It is submitted that the CIT(A) 's order relied upon the IT A T's order in the assessee's own case for the Asst.Year 2002-03 has not become final and appeal to the High Court have been preferred by the Department. 4.1 The ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Coke OYer project expenses of Rs. 1,68,39,0001- claimed as revenue expenditure 4.2 The Id. CIT(A) ought to have considered this expenditure as capital in nature. 4..3 It is submitted that the expenditure claimed on coke oven project has not been debited in the profit & loss account, not incurred towa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2.2 It is submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble IT AT, relied upon by the learned CIT(A), in ITA NO.726/Mds/2010 dt. 16-12-2010 for the AY 2006-07 and ITA No 22/Mds 12011 dt. 08-11-2011 for the AY.2007-08 in the assessee's own case has not become final and the department has preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras u/s.260A. 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to treat the Royalty expenditure as revenue expenditure and withdraw the depreciation allowed on it. 3.2 Having regard to the amended provisions of Sec.32, allowing depreciation on intangible assets, the learned CIT(A) ought to have upheld the action of the Assessing Officer of treating the expenditure ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1 5 of the Act relying upon the decision of the ITAT in the case of group concern M/s Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd for the A' 2007 -08 in ITA No 320/Mds/2011 dt. 10-10-2011. 5.2 It is submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble IT AT, relied upon by the learned CIT(A), in in the case of group concern M/s Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd for the AY. 2007-08 in ITA No. 320/Mds/2011 dt. 10-10-2011 has not become final and the Department has preferred an appeal before the Hon'ble High Court u/s.260A. 6. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time hearing, it is prayed that the order of the learned CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored." 3. On behalf of the Revenu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate bench (supra). The Revenue's only contention is that the same have not attained finality and it's appeals u/s .260 of the Act are pending before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. This itself, in our opinion, does not form basis to disturb the findings of the CIT(A) as mere pendency of the appeal cannot form the basis for not taking into consideration the opinion of the learned co-ordinate bench. Hence, we are not inclined to interfere on this sole plea. Consequently, except Ground Nos.4.1 to 4.3 in ITA 896/Mds/2012, we uphold the orders of CIT(A). 7. Coming to Ground Nos.4.1 to 4.3 in ITA No.896/Mds/2012(supra), the Revenue's contention is that CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Coke over project expenses of Rs. 1,68,39,00....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt instead of reducing in computation of total taxable income. Further ground was that there was lack of supporting evidence and since there was no income in the Profit and loss account, therefore, no allowance could be claimed. The A.O. also relied on assessee's annual report whilst observing that the same did not discuss about the project in question. In view thereof, the A.O. disallowed the above said claim of Rs. 1,68,39,000/-. 12. The assesse carried further the matter in appeal wherein the CIT(A) has accepted the assessee's arguments by holding that the expenses in question are in the shape of revenue expenditure being claimed in the computation of income without debiting in the P&L account. The CIT(A) while allowing the appeal has....