T.K.HASSAN, CHENNAI V. ITO CORPORATE WARD 4(1), CHENNAI

ITA 1488/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5203 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A SUNDARARAJAN
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND SHRI SHRREYANS
• Keywords: Depreciation; Set aside
• Section: 40A(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !', $ '% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1488/CHNY/2019 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI T.K. HASSAN, NO.18/3A, MENAMBEDU ROAD, PADI, MANNURPET, CHENNAI - 600 050. PAN : AALPH 1433 M V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 4(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE SHRI SHRREYANS, ADVOCATE ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A. SUNDARARAJAN, ADDL. CIT 0 . 1$ / DATE OF HEARING : 24.09.2019 23( . 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.11.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -8, CHENNA I, DATED 06.12.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2 I.T.A. NO.1488/CHNY/19 2. THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO DIS ALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION AT THE RATE OF 30%. 3. SHRI D. ANAND, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEPRECIATION AT THE RATE OF 30% ON CRAWLER CRANES. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUN SEL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(APPEALS) DISAL LOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE CRAWLER CRAN ES ARE NOT MOTOR VEHICLES, THEREFORE, THEY ALLOWED DEPRECIATIO N AT THE RATE OF 15% INSTEAD OF 30%. PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 -09 AND 2012- 13 IN I.T.A. NO.1569 & 1570/CHNY/2017, THE LD.COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL HAS ALLOWED D EPRECIATION AT THE RATE OF 30% AFTER PLACING RELIANCE ON THE DECIS ION OF CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN SANCO TRANS LTD. V. ACIT (1997) 61 ITD 317. 4. WE HEARD SHRI A. SUNDARARAJAN, THE LD. DEPARTMEN TAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT T HIS TRIBUNAL IN SANCO TRANS LTD. (SUPRA) EXAMINED THIS ISSUE AND FO UND THAT CRAWLER CRANE IS ENTITLED FOR HIGHER DEPRECIATION. IN THE ASSESSEE'S 3 I.T.A. NO.1488/CHNY/19 OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND 2012-13, THIS TRIBUNAL BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF SANCO TRANS LTD. (SUPRA), FOUND THAT THE CRAWLER CRANE IS ENTITLED FOR DEPREC IATION AT THE RATE OF 30%. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS UNABLE TO UPHO LD THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF T HIS TRIBUNAL IN SANCO TRANS LTD. (SUPRA) AND IN THE ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND 2012-13, WE HOLD THAT THE CRAWLER CRANES ARE ENTITLED FOR DEPRECIATION AT THE RATE OF 30%. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO ALLOW DEPRECIATION AT THE RA TE OF 30% ON THE CRAWLER CRANES. 5. THE NEXT ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISAL LOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF TH E INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 6. SHRI D. ANAND, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT NO PAYMENT EXCEEDED 20,000/- PER DAY. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, ALL THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE AT THE SITE AND IT WAS WITHIN THE LIMIT PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE AC T. THIS TRIBUNAL, IN THE ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 -09 AND 2012- 4 I.T.A. NO.1488/CHNY/19 13, EXAMINED THIS ISSUE AND REMITTED THE MATTER BAC K TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RECONSIDERATION. THEREFO RE, THE LD.COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT FOR THIS YEAR ALSO THE MA TTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RECONSIDERATION. 7. WE HEARD SHRI A. SUNDARARAJAN, THE LD. D.R. ALSO . AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WITH REGARD TO PAYMENT WHICH EXCEED ED PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF 20,000/- WAS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER BY THIS TRIBUNAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-0 9 AND 20012-13. THEREFORE, AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD.COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE, FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ALSO, THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER SHALL RE- EXAMINE THE MATTER. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH TH E AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT IS REMITTED BACK TO HIS FILE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER I N THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL THAT MAY BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THER EAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5 I.T.A. NO.1488/CHNY/19 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 5 TH NOVEMBER, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !') ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 5 TH NOVEMBER, 2019. KRI. . ,167 87(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+/ APPELLANT 2. ,-*+/ RESPONDENT 3. 0 91 () /CIT(A)-8, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, CHENNAI-4, CHENNAI 5. 7: ,1 /DR 6. ;' < /GF.