Annexure XIV Continued… - Edelweiss

SCPL has filed an appeal no. 1880/Mum-2010) dated March 10, ,2010 before the ITAT, Mumbai against the
CIT Appeal, Mumbai order dated December 21, 2009. The CIT Appeals has upheld the additions made by the
assessing officer i.e. ` 40 million of expenditure on technical know how; ` 9.09 million of depreciation
disallowance; ` 4.63 million of expenditure on repair and maintenance on road and bridges treated as capital
expenditure and ` 9.3 million expenditure on lease rent treated as prior period. SCPL was in appeal before the
CIT Appeals against the assessment order dated December 27, 2006 passed by Deputy Commissioner of
Income Tax, Circle 1(3), Mumbai.
13. SCPL v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(3), Mumbai before the ITAT for the A.Y. 2005-
2006
SCPL has filed an appeal no. 1881/Mum-2010 dated March 10,2010 before the ITAT, Mumbai against the CIT
Appeals Mumbai order dated December 21, 2009 wherein the CIT Appeals upheld the additions ` 8.48 million
being disallowance of depreciation, ` 4.82 million of expenditure on repair and maintenance on road and
bridges treated as capital expenditure; ` 39.2 million disallowance of non-compete fee. SCPL was in appeal
before CIT Appeals against the assessment order dated December 28,2007 passed by the Deputy
Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle1(3), Mumbai. The amount involved in the appeal is ` 10.87 million
which has already been adjusted against refunds due to SCPL. The appeal is currently pending before ITAT.
14. SCPL v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(3), Mumbai before the CIT Appeals for the
A.Y. 2006-2007
SCPL has filed an appeal dated January 13, 2009 before CIT Appeals – XXI, Mumbai against the assessment
order dated December 24, 2008 passed by Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Circle 1(3), Mumbai
wherein the assessing officer has disallowed ` 2.84 million being depreciation disallowance and ` 4.80 million
of expenditure on repair and maintenance on road and bridges treated as capital expenditure. As a result of
assessment order, a demand of ` 14.92 million was raised which has already been adjusted against refunds due
to SCPL. The amount involved in the appeal is ` 14.92 million and matter is currently pending.
15. SCPL v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(3), Mumbai before the CIT Appeals for the
A.Y. 2007-2008
SCPL has filed an appeal dated January 14, 2010 before CIT (Appeals) – XXI, Mumbai against the assessment
order dated December 14, 2009 passed by Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Circle 1(3), Mumbai
where in the assessing officer has made disallowances i.e. ` 1.5 million towards donations; ` 1.95 million
towards disallowance of depreciation; ` 4.71 million of expenditure on repair and maintenance on road and
bridges treated as capital expenditure and ` 0.8 million towards late deposit of provident fund. As a result of
assessment order, a demand of ` 0.89 million was raised, which has already been adjusted against refunds due
to SCPL. The amount involved in the appeal is ` 0.89 million and matter is currently pending.
16. Appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax for the A.Y. 2008-09
SCPL has filed an appeal dated January 17, 2011 before CIT Appeals – 2, Mumbai against the assessment
order dated December 20, 2010 passed by Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Circle 1(3), Mumbai
wherein the assessing officer has made disallowances i.e. ` 2.94 million of expenditure on repair and
maintenance on road and bridges treated as capital expenditure; ` 0.86 million towards late deposit of
provident fund, disallowance of depreciation of ` 3.1 million and ` 8.64 million towards expenditure paid for
loading and under loading. The amount involved in the appeal is ` 2.60 million and the matter is currently
pending.
Service Tax
Chief Commissioner Excise, Raipur (“CCE”) v. SCPL before CESTAT
CCE filed an appeal no. ST/1281/2010-CU (DB) against the order dated March 11, 2010 passed by the
Commissioner (Appeals), wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) dropped the service tax demand on SCPL for
the period July to September 2006 and waived off the penalty amounting to 0.72 million imposed on SCPL
under section 78 of the Finance Act. The appeal is currently pending before the CESTAT
322