DCIT, Jaipur V. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PVT. LTD., Jaipur

ITA 112/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5325 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MAN SINGH MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH AGARWAL CA DHK
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS [KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YAD AV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 112/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 THE DCIT CIRCLE- 7 JAIPUR CUKE VS. M/S. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY LTD. 286, KM, TOLL PLAZA, AJMER ROAD NH-8, VILLAGE, THIKARIA, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AABCG 5541 VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI MAN SINGH MEENA,CIT-DR FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY :SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, CA LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 03/05/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13/05/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-III, JAIPUR DATED 25-11-2014 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10 WHEREIN THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUN DS. 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWAN CE OF RS. 33,01,22,188/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF DEPREC IATION CLAIMED ON ROAD/ ON ROAD CONSTRUCTION, WHILE TREATI NG IT AS A BUILDING. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF ITA NO. 112/JP/2015 DCIT, CIRCLE- 7,JAIPUR VS. M/S. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSW AY (P) LTD. , JAIPUR . 2 DEPRECIATION @ 60% ON EDP EQUIPMENTS AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AS AGAINST THE RATE OF 15% ALLOWED BY THE AO. 2.2 AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT SIMILAR ISSUES HAVE BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE A SSESSEE BY THE COORDINATE BENCH VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 28-08-2014 IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE VIDE REVENUES APPEAL BEARING ITA NO. 878/JP/2011 F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2.3 THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO 2.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT EMERGES FROM THE RECORD THA T ON SIMILAR ISSUES THE COORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE BEARING REV ENUES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 878/JP/2011 HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS. 7. THE FIRST AND SECOND GROUNDS OF THE DEPARTMENT AL APPEAL ARE AGAINST DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 36,09,51,9 60/- AND ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION CL AIMED ON ROAD/ ON ROAD CONSTRUCTION. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERV ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THAT THE DEPRECIATION AMOUNTING TO RS. 38,9 0,23,526/-, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FILE REVISED COMPUTATION OF DEPRECIATI ON BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS PER DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT FOR A.Y. 2006-07, W HICH WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT WAS INCREASED TO RS. 39,39,53,179/- IN A.Y. 2006-07, THIS ISSUE OF DEPRE CIATION WAS DECIDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) BUT THE HONBLE ITAT HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 8. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSE SSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LEARNED CIT( A) WHO HAD ALLOWED THE ITA NO. 112/JP/2015 DCIT, CIRCLE- 7,JAIPUR VS. M/S. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSW AY (P) LTD. , JAIPUR . 3 ASSESSEES APPEAL AND 10% DEPRECIATION ON ROAD AS L AW AMENDED AND IT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE HEAD OF THE BUILDING FOR DEPRE CIATION PURPOSES. 9. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 10. THE LEARNED D.R. RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE L EARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AND ARGUED THAT THE MATTER IS PENDING BEFOR E THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICERS VIEW MAY PLEASE BE CONFIRMED. 11. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSE E HAS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND ARGUED THAT THE HONBLE ITAT IN ITA NO. 193/JP/2009 FOR A.Y. 2006-07 VIDE ORDER DATED 26/6/ 2009 AT PAGE NO. 49 IN PARAGRAPH NOS. 11.4,11.4.1, 11.4.2 AND 11.4.3 ALLOW ED THE DEPRECIATION @ 10% ON EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON ROAD BY CONSIDERING THE AMENDMENT MADE IN ITEM NUMBER BUILDING IN DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE IN FA VOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. SIMILAR FINDINGS IN ITA NO. 385/JP/2010 FOR A.Y. 20 07-08 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE HAS BEEN GIVEN ON PAGE NO. 2 OF THE ORDER DATE D 28/9/2010. FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE COORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.YS. 2006-07 AND 2007-08 AS STATED ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALL OWED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE OF DEPRECIATION. THEREFORE, WE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 2.5 SIMILARLY IN RESPECT OF GROUND NO. 2, THE COOR DINATE BENCH VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 26-06-2009 IN ITA NO. 193/JP/2009 F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 10.4. WE HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE PARTIES, THE UNDISPUTED FACTS ARE T HAT THE APPELLANT INSTALLED EDP SYSTEM AND INCURRED AN EXPENDITURE OF RS. 9,54,15,351/-. HAVING CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ITEMS AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT AS EDP EQUIPMENT ARE PERIPHERALS TO THE COMPUTER SYSTEM INSTALLED BY THE APPELLANT TO MANAGE, CONTROL AND REGULATE THE TRAFFIC SYSTEM ON ITS TOLL S TO GENERATE REVENUE WHICH HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED FAR AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. THE DEPARTMENT HAVE BROUGHT NO MATERIAL ON RECORD T O SHOW THAT THE SAID ITEMS ARE NOT COMPUTER PERIPHERALS. WE ALSO FIND SU PPORT FROM THE ITA NO. 112/JP/2015 DCIT, CIRCLE- 7,JAIPUR VS. M/S. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSW AY (P) LTD. , JAIPUR . 4 DECISION RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE OF DELHI BENCH IN CASE OF EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL LTD. (SUPRA) PARA 17 WHEREOF (PAGE 66 1) IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LEARNED RE PRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES HAVE AGREED THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY C OVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF A CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 REN DERED VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 19 TH JULY, 2007 IN ITA NO. 4364/DEL./2006 WHEREIN IT WA S HELD THAT THE PERIPHERALS SUCH AS PRINTERS, SCANNERS, NT SERV ER, ETC. FORM INTEGRAL PART OF THE COMPUTER AND THE SAME, THEREFORE, ARE E LIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION AT A HIGHER RATE AS APPLICABLE TO A CO MPUTER. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSE SSEES OWN CASE, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON T HIS ISSUE AND DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE DEPRECIATION ON THE COMPUTER PE RIPHERAL ITEMS AT A HIGHER RATE OF 60 PER CENT AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESS EE COMPANY. GROUND NO. 1 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOW ED. 10.5. WE THUS BY HOLDING THAT THE COMPUTER PERIPHE RALS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE DEPRECIATION AT THE RATES APPLICAB LE TO THE COMPUTER SYSTEM AND FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE DELHI BENC H OF THE TRIBUNAL, ALLOW THIS GROUND WITH THE DIRECTIONS THAT THE DEPR ECIATION @ 60% BE ALLOWED ON RS. 9,54,15,351/-. THUS, GROUND NO. 6 IS ALLOWED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. 2.6 IN VIEW OF THE SIMILAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ASSESSEE'S CASE AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF COORDIN ATE BENCH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE (SUPRA), THE APPEAL OF THE REVE NUE IS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 112/JP/2015 DCIT, CIRCLE- 7,JAIPUR VS. M/S. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSW AY (P) LTD. , JAIPUR . 5 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 /05/ 2016. SD/- SD/- FOE FLAG ;KNO DQY HKKJR (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (KUL BHARAT) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 13 /5/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 7, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- M/S. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY (P) LTD . JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY ) @ CIT(A), 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.112/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR ITA NO. 112/JP/2015 DCIT, CIRCLE- 7,JAIPUR VS. M/S. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSW AY (P) LTD. , JAIPUR . 6