ACIT, UDAIPUR V. M/s. Orient Glazes Ltd., UDAIPUR

ITA 194/JODH/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7945 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 20-11-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R KOKANIDR
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 194/JU/2012 [ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09] A.C.I.T, VS. M/S ORIENT GLAZES LTD CIRCLE -2 , G 1, 90- 93, UDYOG VIHAR UDAIPUR. SUKHER, UDAIPUR PAN NO. A AACO 6932 G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : N O N E DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI G.R. KOKANI(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 20.11.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.12.2012 ORDER PER HARI OM MARATHA, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 -09 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), UD AIPUR DATED 28/02/2012. DESPITE BEING DULY SERVED, NOBODY CAME TO REPRESENT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE/RESPONDENT, T HEREFORE, WE HEARD THE APPEAL EX-PARTE. 2 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEA L : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN : 1. DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXCESS DEPRECIATION OF RS. 13,66,440/- CLAIMED ON WIND-MILL. 2. DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION CLAIMED @ 80% ON EVACUATION CHARGES OF RS. 20,20,000/-. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE-COMPANY DERIVES INCOME FROM MANUFACTURING OF CERAMIC GLAZED FRIT RIGHT. FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09, I T FILED RETURN OF INCOME [ROI] ALONGWITH COPY OF AUDITED AC COUNTS AND TAX AUDIT REPORT OBTAINING U/S 3CD ON 29.10.200 8 DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 2,84,02,233/-. THE ASSESSE E HAS GOT A WIND-MILL INSTALLED THROUGH M/S SUZLON INFRASTRUC TURE LTD. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEPRECIATION ON CIVIL AND ELEC TRICAL WORKS, EVACUATION CHARGES AND POWER AND TURBINE WHI CH WAS DECLINED BY THE A.O. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS REVERSED THE FINDING OF THE A.O. AND HAS ALLOWED DEPRECIATIO N ON THESE 3 ITEMS. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE ISSUE OF CIVIL/ELECT RICAL CONSTRUCTION WORK AND CONCRETE STRUCTURE RAISED TO TAKE UP THE LOADS ARE PART AND PARCEL OF MAIN PLANT AND DEP RECIATION IS ELIGIBLE ON THE SAME AS IT BECOMES PART OF CAPIT AL ASSET. OUR ABOVE FINDING IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF T HE HON'BLE PUNE BENCH OF THE ITAT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF POON AWALA FINVET AGRO P. LTD REPORTED IN 118 TTJ [PUNE] 68 AN D THE DECISION OF JAIPUR BENCH IN THE CASE OF VIJAY INDUS TRIES VS. ACIT RENDERED IN ITA NO. 745/JODHPUR/2007 ORDER DAT ED 18.7.208 IN WHICH DECISION OF HON'BLE RAJASTHAN HIG H COURT IN THE CASE OF R.G. INSPAT LTD [1995] 186 CTR [RAJ] 26 2 HAS BEENFOLLWOED. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE H ON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. MADRAS C EMENTS LTD [1977] 110 ITR 281 [MAD]. THIS ISSUE ALSO FURT HER STANDS COVERED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION [2001] 247 ITR 268 [SC] . ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THIS APPEA L OF THE REVENUE. 4 4. THE ISSUE RELATING TO DEPRECIATION CLAIMED @ 80% IS ALSO COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. AS A RESULT, WE CANNOT ALLOW THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 17 TH DECEMBER, 2012 SD/- SD/- (N.K.SAINI) [HARI OM MARATHA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 17 TH DECEMBER , 2012 VL/- COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) BY ORDER 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, JODHPUR