Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. Kasturi Mills Ltd. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberT.C.P. No. 222 of 1980
Judge
Reported in[1981]129ITR12(Mad)
ActsIncome Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 256(2)
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore
RespondentKasturi Mills Ltd.
Appellant AdvocateA.N. Rangaswamy, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateS.V. Subramaniam, Adv.
Excerpt:
- .....representing the cost of modernisation of the mills' machinery can be said to be in the nature of revenue expenditure and should, therefore, be allowed as a deduction in computing the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1974-75 ?' 2. we find that the decision of the tribunal is based completely on facts and no question of law as such arises. the learned counsel for the revenue while conceding that individual items of expenditure which are held as revenue may be revenue expenditure contends that if one considers the entirely of the expenditure as a whole it will be a capital expenditure. we are unable to agree with this line of reasoning. once individual items can be considered as revenue, the sum total of it cannot be treated as capital. the assessee himself has returned an.....
Judgment:

Ramaswami, J.

1. 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 expenditure and should, therefore, be allowed as a deduction in computing the income of the assessee for the assessment year 1974-75 ?'

2. We find that the decision of the Tribunal is based completely on facts and no question of law as such arises. The learned counsel for the revenue while conceding that individual items of expenditure which are held as revenue may be revenue expenditure contends that if one considers the entirely of the expenditure as a whole it will be a capital expenditure. We are unable to agree with this line of reasoning. Once individual items can be considered as revenue, the sum total of it cannot be treated as capital. The assessee himself has returned an expenditure of 29 lakhs of rupees incurred in modernisation of the mill as capital. Only certain items of expenditure were claimed as revenue and were, on facts found to be correct by the Tribunal. We, therefore, consider that no question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. This petition accordingly fails and it is dismissed with costs. Counsel fee Rs. 250.


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