COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX Vs. VISHAL PAPER INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), is arising out of an order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal") on March 26, 2012--since reported in Vishal Paper Industries v. Joint CIT,2013 21 ITR 220 , whereby the expenses claimed by the assessee on account of repairs and maintenance were allowed though, earlier such expenses were disallowed for the reason that such expenses are capital expenditure in nature. The appellant has claimed the following substantial question of law:

(2.) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has found that many items were purchased by the assessee which led to the conclusions as mentioned above. We find that the increase of life by repairs and maintenance of the existing assets beyond their original estimated economic life cannot be a ground to return a finding that it was not a case of repairs. Repairs and maintenance are in fact necessary not only for achieving the optimum utilization of machinery but also if possible to extend its economic life. Therefore, the fact that such installation has increased the life beyond their original economic life cannot be a ground to return a finding that the expenses incurred were not for repairs and maintenance. Similarly, the ground of increase in the profitability of concern is again a totally alien to determine the nature of the repair and maintenance Increase in profit would lead to increase in income, which would be separately taxable but could not be a ground for declining the expenses incurred by the assessee for repairs and maintenance. Though the finding returned is that new identifiable assets have been created the Tribunal has returned a finding that though each of the items is usable independently such items have been used for repairs and maintenance. With such finding, the expenditure was allowed.

(3.) In view of the said fact, we find that the findings recorded by the Tribunal are the findings of fact. We do not find any substantial question of law arises for consideration. Dismissed.