The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar V. M/s. Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd., Gandhinagar

ITA 1803/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5937 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 05-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M G PATEL HEARING CONCLUDED O
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

ITA NO.1803/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND RAJPAL YADAV JM] ITA NO.1803/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR. .....................APPELLANT VS. SARDAR SAROVAR NARMADA NIGAM LTD., ...... ........... RESPONDENT 7 TH FLOOR, BLOCK NO.12, NEW SACHIVALAYA COMPLEX, GANDHINAGAR. [PAN: AACCS 6704 L] APPEARANCES BY MUDIT NAGPAL FOR THE APPELLANT M.G. PATEL FOR THE RESPONDENT HEARING CONCLUDED ON: 06.03.2018 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 07.03.2018 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR, AM: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER APP ELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF LEARNED CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 08.04.2 016, IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. GRIEVANCES RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ARE AS FOLLOW S :- I) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN APPLYING THE COST SHARING FORMULA FOR DETERMINING THE COST OF ASSETS OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEPRECIATION. II) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ALLOWING COMMON EXPENDITURE IN FULL INCLUDED IN PENDING CAPITALISAT ION. III) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA NO.1803/AHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 PAGE 2 OF 2 IV) IT IS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER BE RESTORED. 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIR LY AGREE THAT BOTH THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE COVERED, IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESS EE, IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ORDER OF THE LD . CIT(A). WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. TH ESE TWO ISSUES HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCHES OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSE SSEES OWN CASE FILED BY THE REVENUE IN ITA NO.944/AHD/2011 FOR A.Y. 2007-08 VID E ORDER DATED 05.09.2014, ITA NO.420 & CO NO.80/AHD/2012 FOR A.Y. 2008-09 VIDE OR DER DATED 29.04.2016, ITA NOS.717 & 911/AHD/2014 FOR A.Y. 2009-10 VIDE ORDER DATED 21.12.2016 & ITA NO.265/AHD/2015 FOR A.Y. 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 1 5.09.2017 AND DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. 5. AS THE ISSUES STAND COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE BY THE ORDERS OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCHES (SUPRA), WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 7 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018. SD/- SD/- RAJPAL YADAV PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEM BER) DATED: 7 TH MARCH, 2018 PBN/* COPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD