Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Gosline Mario and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(2000)158CTR(SC)538; [2000]241ITR312(SC); (2000)10SCC165
ActsIncome Tax Act - Sections 10(14)
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax
RespondentGosline Mario and ors.
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
- sections 37 &31: [tarun chatterjee & aftab alam, jj] revenue expenditure expenses on replacement of machinery held, each machine in a segment of a textile mills has an independent role to play in the mill and the output of each division different from the other. hence, the entire textile mill machinery cannot be regarded as a single asset, replacement of parts of which can be considered to be for mere purpose of preserving or maintaining this asset. all machines put together constitute the production process and each separate machine is an independent entity. replacement of such an old machine with a new one and not repair of the old and existing machine. also, a new asset in a textile mill is not only for temporary use, rather it gives the purchaser an enduring benefit of better and.....1. the principal question relating to salaries and allowances paid by the italian concern to its technicians deputed to work with fci ltd. is fairly stated to be covered against the revenue by the judgment of this court in commissioner of income-tax v. s.r. patton : [1998]233itr166(sc) . this covers the first four questions. the fifth question relates to the daily allowance that was paid by the indian concern to these technicians. the tribunal and the high court have held that this daily allowance was exempt from tax under section 10(14) of the act and it appears to us that it cannot be argued to the contrary. the appeal is dismissed affirming the answers given by the high court. no order as to costs.
Judgment:

1. The principal question relating to salaries and allowances paid by the Italian concern to its technicians deputed to work with FCI Ltd. is fairly stated to be covered against the Revenue by the judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. S.R. Patton : [1998]233ITR166(SC) . This covers the first four questions. The fifth question relates to the daily allowance that was paid by the Indian concern to these technicians. The Tribunal and the High Court have held that this daily allowance was exempt from tax under Section 10(14) of the Act and it appears to us that it cannot be argued to the contrary. The appeal is dismissed affirming the answers given by the High Court. No order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //