ACIT, Coimbatore V. M/s. Associated Autotex Ancilliaries (P) Ltd., Coimbatore

ITA 1670/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64560 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1670/MDS/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I(2), 63, RACE COURSE, COIMBATORE 641 018. (APPELLANT) V. M/S ASSOCIATED AUTOTEX ANCILLIARIES (P) LTD., 13/20, SITRA, KALAPATTY ROAD, COIMBATORE 14. PAN : AACCA2278B (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :SHRI GURU BASHYAM, JCIT RESPONDENT BY :SHRI A.S. SRIRAMAN , ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING :19.11.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :19.11.2012 O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : IN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, ITS GRIEVANC E IS THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) DIRECTED ALLOWANCE OF HIGHER DEPRECIAT ION ON WIND MILLS. AS PER THE REVENUE, ASSESSEE HAD NOT EXERCISED OPTI ON FOR CLAIMING HIGHER DEPRECIATION ALLOWED UNDER RULE 5(1A) OF INC OME-TAX RULES, 1962. I.T.A. NO. 1670/MDS/12 2 2. FACTS APROPOS ARE THAT ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEPR ECIATION OF 80% ON WIND MILLS ADDED BY IT DURING THE RELEVANT P REVIOUS YEAR. AS PER THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS ENTITLED TO OPT FOR HIGHER DEPRECIATION UNDER RULE 5(1A) AND THE RETURN FILED PREFERRING SUCH HIG HER CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION COULD BE CONSIDERED AS AN OPTION. THI S VIEW WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE A.O. HOWEVER, LD. CIT(APPEALS) ACC EPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE RELYING ON THE DECISION OF CO-ORDIN ATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KKSK LEATHER PROCESSORS PVT . LTD. V. ITO (126 ITD 215). 3. NOW BEFORE US, LEARNED D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE WAS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF CO -ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KKSK LEATHER PROCESSOR S PVT. LTD. (SUPRA). 4. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS. CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ABOVE SAID DECISION HAD HELD THAT F OR EXERCISING OPTION FOR CLAIMING HIGHER DEPRECIATION, IT WAS SUFFICIENT IF THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE SUCH A CLAIM IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY IT. NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE US TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW ON THE MATTER. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. I.T.A. NO. 1670/MDS/12 3 THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON MONDAY, TH E 19 TH OF NOVEMBER, 2012, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (V.DURGA RAO) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 19 TH NOVEMBER, 2012. KRI. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A)-I, COIMBATORE (4) CIT-I, COIMBATORE (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE