The ACIT, Circle-1(1), Visakhapatnam V. M/s Vijaya Medical Centre, Visakhapatnam

CO 37/VIZ/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5795 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 02-03-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 17-01-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C V S MURTHY
• Assessee Lawyers: D S SUNDER SINGH
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

ITA 433/V/10 VIJAYA MEDICAL CENTRE, VSKP IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 433 /VIZAG/ 20 10 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 - 06 ACIT CIRCLE - 1 (1) VISAKHAPATNAM VS. M/S. VIJAYA MEDICAL CENTRE VISAKHAPATNAM (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AAAF V 9331 P CO NO. 37 /VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005 - 06 ACIT CIRCLE - 1 (1) VISAKHAPATNAM VS. M/S. VIJAYA MEDICAL CENTRE VISAKHAPATNAM (APPELLANT) (RESPOND ENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI C.V.S. MURTHY, CA ORDER PER SHRI S.K. YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. IN THE GIVEN FACTS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT UPHOLDING THE ACTION THE A.O. IN RESTRICTING THE GRANT OF DEPRECI ATION AT 25%, IN SO MUCH AS SOME OF THE ASSETS/MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS ARE N OT LIFE SAVING EQUIPMENTS. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BY FAILING TO APPRECIATE T HAT UNDER APPENDIX IA TO THE IT RULES, 1962, ONLY MRI EQUIPME NTS AND COLOUR DOPPLERS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION @ 40% AND OT HER ASSETS/EQUIPMENTS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO DEPRECIATION AT THE RATE THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO ALLOW. HENCE , THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS IN SO MUCH AS THAT IT I S CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T. RULES, 1962. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES INDULGENCE FOR ADDING, DELETIN G OR ALTERING ANY OF THE OR ALL OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, AS THE CASE MAY BE. ITA 433/V/10 VIJAYA MEDICAL CENTRE, VSKP 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CROSS OBJECTION IN SU PPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AN D CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE MAIN DISPUTE RAIS ED IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO THE HIGHER DEPRECIATION ON LIFE SAVING ME DICAL EQUIPMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE HIGHER DEPRECIATION AT 40% ON VARIOUS MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS ON THE GROUND THAT THESE EQUIPMENTS ARE PART AND PARCEL OF THE LIFE SAVING MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS PRESCRIBED IN THE SC HEDULE FOR HIGHER DEPRECIATION. THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HAVE GRANTED THE HIGHER DEPRECIATION ON ALL THOSE MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN IDE NTIFIED IN THE SCHEDULE BUT DENIED OTHER EQUIPMENTS ON THE GROUND THAT THEY ARE NOT THE PART AND PARCEL OF THE LIFE SAVING MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS. MATT ER WENT TO THE CIT(A) AND THE CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE HIGHER DEPRECIATION ON O THER EQUIPMENTS ALSO. 3. NOW THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL WITH THE CONTENTION THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT VERIFIED THE FACTS T HAT THE OTHER EQUIPMENTS RELATED TO MRI AND COLOUR DOPPLERS ARE NOT PART AND PARCEL OF THE LIFE SAVING EQUIPMENTS I.E. MRI AND COLOUR DOPPLERS MENTIONED I N THE SCHEDULE. THEREFORE, THE HIGHER DEPRECIATION CANNOT BE GRANTE D. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, A SP ECIFIC QUERY WAS RAISED FROM THE ASSESSEE AS TO ON WHAT BASIS IT CLAIMS THA T THESE EQUIPMENTS ARE PART AND PARCEL OF THE MRI AND COLOUR DOPPLERS I.E. LIFE SAVING MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS. HAS HE OBTAINED ANY CERTIFICATE FROM T HE TECHNICIANS OR THE MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS? THE LD. D.R. FURTHER CONTEN DED THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPERT OPINION WITH REGARD TO THESE EQUIPMENTS WHETHER IT FORMS PART AND PARCEL OF THE LIFE SAVING MEDICAL EQUIPMENTS, M ATTER MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICA TION IN THIS REGARD. SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH ANY CERTIFICATE EITH ER FROM THE MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS OR FROM THE TECHNICIANS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION THAT THE IMPUGNED EQUIPMENTS ARE PART AND PARCEL OF THE MRI AND COLOUR DOPPLERS, I.E. THE LIFE SAVING EQUIPMENTS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE NEEDS FURTHER ENQUIRY OR A VERIFICATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE ACCORDINGLY, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE A.O. WITH A DIRECTION TO MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION OR ENQUIRY IN ORDER TO DETERMINE ITA 433/V/10 VIJAYA MEDICAL CENTRE, VSKP 3 WHETHER THE IMPUGNED EQUIPMENTS FORMS PART AND PARC EL OF MRI AND COLOUR DOPPLERS, I.E. THE LIFE SAVING EQUIPMENTS. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO FILE THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION THAT THESE EQUIPMENTS BEING A PART AND PARCEL OF THE MRI OR CO LOUR DOPPLERS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR HIGHER DEPRECIATION. SINCE THE APPEAL OF THE RE VENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE C.O. OF THE ASSESSEE WHIC H IS IN SUPPORT OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED AND C.O. OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2.3.2011 SD/- SD/- (BR BASKARAN) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATED 2 ND MARCH, 2011 COPY TO 1 THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM 2 M/S. VIJAYA MEDICAL CENTRE, 14 - 37 - 5, KRISHNA NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM 3 THE CI T, VISAKHAPATNAM 4 THE CIT (A) , VISAKHAPATN AM 5 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 6 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM