M/s. M.M.Forgings Limited, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

CO 143/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7358 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 19-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-07-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: T N BETGERI IRS
• Keywords: Depreciation; Additional depreciation
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1277(MDS)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 & C.O. NO.143(MDS)/2011 IN ITA NO.1277(MDS)/2011 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE IV(3), CHENNAI. VS. M/S.MM FORGINGS LTD., GUINDY HOUSE, 95-ANNA SALAI, CHENNAI-32. PAN AAACM2164L. (APPELLANT) ( RESPONDENT/CROSS OBJECTOR) APPELLANT BY : SHRI T.N.BETGERI, IRS, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PHILIP GEORGE, AD VOCATE DATE OF HEARING : 19 TH JULY, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 TH JULY, 2012 O R D E R PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT: THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE CROSS OB JECTION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2008-09. THE APPEAL AND THE CROSS OBJECTION ARE DI RECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-V - - ITA 1277/11 & CO 143/11 2 AT CHENNAI, DATED 21-4-2011. THEY ARISE OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961. 2. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPE ALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF ADDITIONAL DE PRECIATION ON WINDMILLS. IT IS THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HI TECH AR AI, 321 ITR 477 AND IN THE CASE OF V.T.M.LTD, 319 ITR 336, HAVE NOT BECOME FINAL, AS THE MATTERS HAVE BEEN TAKEN UP BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE. AS OF NOW THE ISSUE STANDS DECIDED BY THE ABOVE JUDGMENTS OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSE E IS ENTITLED FOR ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION ON WINDMILLS. THEREFORE, W E FIND THAT THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) ON THIS POINT IS SUSTAINABLE IN LAW. 3. THE SECOND GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED I N DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A. THE COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER - - ITA 1277/11 & CO 143/11 3 ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 TO 2007-08. THE COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS FOLLOWED THE CORRECT COURSE OF LAW. 4. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, I T IS THE GROUND THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF ADDITIONAL DEPREC IATION ON MACHINERY ACQUIRED AFTER 30-9-2005. WE DO NOT FIND MUCH FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CROSS OBJECTI ON ALSO IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THURSDAY, THE 19 TH OF JULY, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED THE 19 TH JULY, 2012. V.A.P. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) D.R. (6) G.F.