ORDER SHEET IN HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA No. 278 of 2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-IV Versus M/S. KANORIA CHEMICALS & INDUSTRIES LTD. BEFORE: Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA Date : 23rd February, 2015. Mr. Ranjan Sinha, Adv. for appellant Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate, Mr.S.Das, Adv. and Mr. C.S.Das, Adv. for Respondent Court : subject matter of challenge in this appeal is judgment and order dated 23rd April, 2009 by which learned Tribunal rejected appeal preferred by revenue. facts and circumstances of case, briefly stated, are as follows. For assessment year 2003-04, assessee claimed expenditure of sum of Rs.2,94,77,590/- on account of expenditure incurred in restructuring debts. Contention of assessee appearing from its letter dated 13th January, 2006 was that said 2 expenditure is in connection with business of company and has been incurred as company focused on reduction of cost of borrowed capital by restructuring its debt portfolio. As result of this restructuring, cost of newly borrowed capital was reduced to 10% - 10.25% from 14% - 16% payable on loan prepaid , as would appear from assessment order itself. Assessing Officer after noting contention of assessee proceeded to hold that expenditure was capital in nature and it is on this basis he disallowed expenditure. CIT (Appeal) allowed expenditure holding that expenditure was revenue in nature. learned Tribunal has upheld that contention. Aggrieved by this order, revenue has once again come up in appeal. We have heard learned Advocates for parties. There can be no doubt that in case expenditure was incurred for purpose of bringing down liability on account of interest from 14% -16% to 10% - 10.25%, expenditure was, in fact, revenue expenditure, but whether such benefit was, in fact, obtained by assessee is question, which was not gone into at any of three stages. 3 This appeal therefore is disposed of by remanding matter to Assessing Officer for limited purpose of ascertaining whether by incurring expenditure indicated above, assessee, in fact, obtained benefit of reduction of interest on account of moneys borrowed. appeal is thus disposed of. (GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA, J.) (ARINDAM SINHA, J.) km Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-IV v. M/s. Kanoria Chemicals & Industries Ltd