In Nma/976/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax -3 Mumbai v. M/S. Videocon Appliances Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
any, dispensed with.
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.1661 OF 2008
1. Revenue is in appeal on the following two
questions.
i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case the Hon’ble Tribunal was justifiedin law in confirming the order of CIT(A) indirecting to allow deduction u/s.43B of Rs.17.4lacs, ignoring the fact that advance given tothe Excise Department cannot be treated as
payment under the provisions of Sec.43B of theI.T.Act 1961?
ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case the Hon’ble Tribunalwas correct in law in confirming the order ofCIT(A) in holding that the Assessing officer was
not justified in treating the interest andfinance charges of Rs.23.01 lacs as capitalexpenditure?
the appeal.
3. Considering the above, the questions of law
as
framed would not arise. Consequently appealdismissed.
( R.S. MOHITE, J.)
( F.I.REBELLO, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue