Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

September 2019

Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-6(3) vs. M/s Graviss Foods Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 4863/Mum./2014] Pre-operative expense – New project unconnected with the existing business – Deductible u/s 37(1) of the Act

By Ajay R. Singh
Advocate
Reading Time 3 mins

17.  The Pr. CIT-7 vs. M/s Graviss Foods Pvt. Ltd. [Income tax Appeal No. 295 of 2017]; Date of order: 5th April, 2019; A.Y.: 2010-11

 

Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-6(3) vs. M/s Graviss Foods Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 4863/Mum./2014]

 

Pre-operative expense – New project unconnected with the existing business – Deductible u/s 37(1) of the Act

 

The assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing ice cream and other milk products. For the AY 2010-11 the assessee had incurred an expenditure of Rs. 1.80 crores (rounded off) in the process of setting up a factory for production of ‘mawa’, which project the assessee was forced to abandon.

 

The AO was of the opinion that the expenditure was incurred for setting up of a new industry. The expenditure was a pre-operative expenditure and could not have been claimed as revenue expenditure.

 

The AO held that the assessee had entered a new field of business of producing and supplying ‘mawa’ (or ‘khoa’) which is entirely different from the business activity carried on by it. The AO completed the assessment and disallowed the expenditure on the ground that it was incurred in connection with starting a new project, that the expenditure was incurred for setting up a new factory at Amritsar and thus not for the expansion and extension of the existing business but for an altogether new business. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal. The Tribunal relied upon its earlier decision for A.Y. 2009-10 and confirmed the view of the CIT(A) and dismissed the Revenue’s appeal.

 

Before the Hon’ble High Court counsel for Revenue submitted that the assessee was previously engaged in the business of manufacturing ice cream. The assessee desired to set up a new plant at a distant place for production of ‘mawa’. This was, therefore, a clear case of setting up of a new industry.

The High Court observed that there was interlacing of the accounts, management and control. The facts on record as culled out by the Tribunal are that the assessee company was set up with the object to produce or cause to be produced by process, grate, pack, store and sell milk products and ice cream. In furtherance of such objects, the assessee had already set up an ice cream producing unit. Using the same management control and accounts, the assessee attempted to set up another unit for production of ‘mawa’, which is also a milk product. The Tribunal, therefore, rightly held that the expenditure was incurred for expansion of the existing business and it was not a case of setting up of new industry, therefore it was allowable as revenue expenditure.

 

The High Court relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, Gujarat, [1989] 177 ITR 377, and the Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd. (2002) 256 ITR 395 Bom.

 

The Department’s appeal was dismissed.

 

You May Also Like