ACIT, Coimbatore V. M/s. Lakshmi ring Travellers (Cbe) Limited, Coimbatore

ITA 1748/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1166 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2013
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 20-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAGATI KUMAR
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 143(3); 148

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 ------- ITA NO. 1748/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-I(1), COIMBATORE. V. M/S. LAKSHMI RING TRAVELLERS (CBE) LTD., 34-A, KAMARAJ ROAD, COIMBATORE-641 018. (PAN : AAACL3736F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI PRAGATI KUMAR, CIT-DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 07-0 3-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.03.2013 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-I, COIMBATORE DATED 13-07-2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL BY THE REVE NUE RELATES TO THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE CIT(APPEALS) TO THE ITA NO.1748/MDS/2012 : 2 : ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW HIGHER RATE OF DEPRECIAT ION ON WIND MILLS AS PER RULE 5(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 19 62. 3. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE OF RING TRAVELLERS, TEXTILE COMPONENTS. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOM E FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON 30-10-2004 AND THE ASSES SMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' FOR SHORT). SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSE SSMENT WAS RE-OPENED AND NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED. WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DI SALLOWED THE CLAIM OF HIGHER DEPRECIATION ON WIND ENERGY GEN ERATORS. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE TOOK UP THE MATTER BEFOR E THE CIT(APPEALS). BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE DECISIONS OF THE TRI BUNAL, CHENNAI D BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. K.K.S.K. LEAT HER PROCESSORS (P) LTD. V. ITO (126 ITD 215) (CHENNAI) AND THE DECISION OF THE HYDERABAD BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF DY. CIT V. SAMKRG PISTONS & RINGS LTD. (2009) 34 SO T 401 AND STATED THAT THE OPTIONS SHOULD BE EXERCISED IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN FILED WITHIN TIME. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME WITHIN THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN AND ITA NO.1748/MDS/2012 : 3 : THUS DEEMED TO HAVE EXERCISED OPTION FOR CLAIMING T HE DEPRECIATION AS PER THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI IN THE CASE OF M/S. K.K.S .K. LEATHER PROCESSORS(P) LTD. ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSE E. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS COME UP IN A PPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED DR VEHEMENTLY SUP PORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT MERE FURNISHING OF THE RETURN OF INC OME ON OR BEFORE THE DUE DATE SPECIFIED U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS EXERCISING OF THE OPTION UNDER THE AC T FOR HIGHER RATE OF DEPRECIATION. 5. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE APPEAL, PERUSED THE RECORDS AN D GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSES CLAIM OF HIGHER DEPRECIATION ON WIND ENER GY GENERATORS HAS BEEN ALLOWED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBU NAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. K.K.S.K. LEATHER PROCESSORS (P) LTD. (SUPRA), WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD THAT SINCE THERE IS NO SPECIFIC FORM OR METHOD PRESCRIBED FOR EXERCISING OPTION, CL AIM MADE IN RETURN OF INCOME AS WELL AS REFLECTED FROM BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ITA NO.1748/MDS/2012 : 4 : AND AUDIT REPORT FILED ALONG WITH RETURN OF INCOME WAS MORE THAN EXERCISE OF OPTION AS REQUIRED UNDER SECOND PR OVISO TO RULE 5(1A) AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO DEPRECIATION ON WINDMILLS AT A HIGHER RATE. 7. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PA SSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL R AISED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON THURSDAY, THE 7 TH OF MARCH, 2013, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (V.DURGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 7 TH MARCH, 2013. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT(A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE