Commissioner of Income Tax vs Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd.

Admit. After hearing the counsel for the parties, the following substantial questions of law are framed for consideration :-

(1) Whether ITAT was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs 62,43,990 made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing alleged payment made by the assessee to field organizers/ sales promoters for organizing sales of non-levy cement?

(2) Whether ITAT was correct in law in not allowing depreciation on assets relating to water works, water installation and water distribution system forming part of the building at the rate of 10 per cent as against the claim made by the assessee at 25 per cent?

(3) Whether ITAT was correct in law in allowing the assessee to reduce the amount realized on account of higher free sale quota under the sugar incentive scheme holding the same as capital receipt?

(4) Whether ITAT was justified in law in holding that the expenditure of Rs 11,69,526 incurred by the assessee on total quality management project was revenue in nature as no new asset was brought into existence by the assessee?

Filing of paper book is dispensed with. The present appeal be tagged along with IT Appeal Nos. 434/2007 & 435/2007.