SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(Cal) 84

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
S. P. MITRA, K. L. RAY
GANESH SUGAR MILLS LTD. - Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL, III - Respondent
Income-Tax Ref.  142  Of  1965
Decided On : MAY 9, 1968

Advocates Appeared:
B.L.PAL, D.PAL, DIPAK SEN, P.L.KHAITAN

Extra shift depreciation allowance is calculated with reference to the actual number of days on which the extra shifts had worked during the previous years. Contribution towards road development is a capital expenditure and not admissible as a deduction in computing business income.

Headnote:

INCOME TAX - Depreciation - Extra shift depreciation allowance - Calculation - Roads development contribution - Capital expenditure - Not admissible as business income deduction.

Fact of the Case:

The assessee, a sugar mill company, claimed extra shift depreciation allowance and deduction for contribution towards road development. The Income-tax Officer, Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and Tribunal disallowed the claims.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the extra shift depreciation allowance is to be calculated with reference to the actual number of days on which the extra shifts had worked during the previous years. The contribution towards road development was a capital expenditure and not admissible as a deduction in computing business income.

Issues: 1. Whether extra shift depreciation allowance should be calculated with reference to the actual number of days on which the extra shifts had worked during the previous years? 2. Whether the contribution towards road development was a capital expenditure and not admissible as a deduction in computing business income?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The note to Clause III of Rule 8 of the Indian Income-tax Rules 1922 makes it clear that the maximum of the extra depreciation allowable for working double shift is 50% while that of triple shift is 100% of the normal depreciation calculated for the whole year. To this maximum is to be applied the proportion of the actual number of days for which the plant and machinery had been working extra shift to 300, 300 being taken as the normal number of working days in any year. 2. The expenditure incurred by the assessee for road development brought into existence a new asset, viz., the roads which facilitated the carrying on of the assessee's business. The use of the roads would be of "enduring benefit" to the assessee's business and the assessee's expenditure would be a capital expenditure.

Final Decision: The Court answered both questions in the affirmative and against the assessee. The assessee was directed to pay the costs of the reference.

K. L. ROY, J.

( 1 ) BY this Reference under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions to this Court, namely:--"i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that extra shift depreciation allowance in the case of the assessee company must also be calculated with reference to the actual number of days on which the extra shifts had Worked during the previous years to the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-602

( 2 ) WHETHER on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the contribution of Rs. 19,220/- made by the assessee company towards road development was a capital expenditure and as such not admissible as an expenditure in computing its business income for the assessment year 1959-60?"2. The assessee is a company deriving income from certain sugar Mills in the Uttar Pradesh. The assessment years involved are 1958-59 and 1959-60, the corresponding previous years being the years ending on the 31st October, 1957 and the 31st October 1958 respectively. For both these years the assessee company claimed extra shift depreciation allowance equal to the normal depreciation in respect of the machinery and plant utilised in the sugar manufacturing business. There is no dispute that the assessee's factories are seasonal factories which worked only during that part of the year when sugar cane is available. The Income-tax Officer disallowed Rs. 12,259 in the first year and Rs. 15,898 in the second year out of this claim for extra shift allowance. The disallowance was upheld in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and also on further appeal by the Tribunal.

( 3 ) FOR the assessment year 1959-60, the assessee claimed deduction of a sum of Rs. 19,220, being the amount contributed by the assessee company to a Cooperative Society for the purpose of development of the roads giving access to the factories of the assessee company as well as other sugar mills of the locality. The Tribunal has stated that as a result of a conference of the representatives of the State Government, the cane growers and the sugar factory owners held at Nainital sometime in June 1954, a cooperative Society was formed for the purpose of taking up development of roads in the area. These roads were constructed by the Co-operative Society partly on land owned by the assessee company but were meant for common use by the cane growers as well as for transport purposes of the factory owners.

( 4 ) THE claim for deduction of this amount was rejected by the Income-tax Officer as he was of the opinion that the expenditure was a capital expenditure. But he allowed rebate under Section 15b of the Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on appeal by the assessee, concurred with this view of the Income-tax Officer, On further appeal by the assessee to the Tribunal, the Tribunal was of the opinion that as the roads were of substantial construction and as, on the assessee's own admission, at least a part of such net-work of roads fell within the area comprising the assessee's mills, though the roads might not literally belong to the assessee, the contributions made towards the development of such roads were evidently of a capital nature. The Tribunal accordingly rejected the assessee's appeal,

( 5 ) AT the instance of the assessee the questions mentioned above have been referred to this Court by the Tribunal.

( 6 ) ALLOWANCE for depreciation for plant and machinery used for the purposes of the business is provided for in Section 10 (2) (vi) of the Act. In respect of depreciation of such buildings, machinery, plant or furniture, being the property of the assessee, a sum equivalent to such percentage on the written down value thereof as may in any case or class of cases be prescribed is allowable as deduction. The conditions for the allowance and the percentages are prescribed in Rule 8 of the India






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top