ACIT, Salem V. M/s. Jayakrishna Flour Mills (P) Ltd., Salem

ITA 2158/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5141 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 23-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN
• Keywords: Depreciation; Additional depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH B CHENNAI (BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER) .. I.T.A. NO. 2158/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE, SALEM. (APPELLANT) V. M/S JAYAKRISHNA FLOUR MILLS (P) LTD., 5-A, RAJAJI ROAD, SALEM 636 007. PAN : AAACJ5436G (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SALEM IN APPE AL NO.62/09- 10 DATED 28.10.2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN, JUNIOR STANDING COUNSEL REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND NONE REPRESENTED ON BE HALF OF THE ASSESSEE. I.T.A. NO. 2158/MDS/10 2 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. JUNIOR STANDING COUN SEL THAT THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(AP PEALS) IN HOLDING THAT THE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENTS ARE INTEGRAL PART OF THE WINDMILL AS ALSO THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN HOLDING THAT ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION ON WINDMILL. I N REGARD TO THE ISSUE OF TREATING THE ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENTS AS PART OF TH E WINDMILL, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAD FOLLOWED TH E DECISION OF PUNE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF POONAWALA FIN VEST & AGRO (P) LTD. V. ACIT (2008) 118 TTJ (PUNE) 68. IT WAS A FU RTHER SUBMISSION THAT IN REGARD TO THE ISSUE OF GRANTING ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION ON WINDMILL, LD. CIT(APPEALS) RELIED ON THE DECISION O F CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF TAMILNADU CHLORATES V. JCIT (2006) 98 ITD 1 (CHENNAI) AS ALSO THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CHETTINADU CEMENT CORPORATION LTD. IN I.T.A. NO. 1029/MDS/05 D ATED 5.1.2007. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE HAS FILED APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID DECISIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH C OURT. HE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE A.O. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ISSUES WHICH HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL ARE I.T.A. NO. 2158/MDS/10 3 SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF CO-ORDINATE BEN CH OF THIS TRIBUNAL AS REFERRED ABOVE. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS ONLY FOLLOWED THE JUDICIAL DISCIPLINE IN FOLLOW ING THE DECISIONS OF THIS TRIBUNAL, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO ERROR IN THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). THE APPEAL HAS TO BE DISMISS ED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE S TANDS DISMISSED. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 4 TH MAY, 2011. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) ( GEORGE MATHAN) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 4 TH MAY, 2011. KRI. COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A), SALEM (4) CIT, SALEM (5) D.R. (6) GUARD FILE