NELCO LTD, NAVI MUMBAI V. DCIT RG 8(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2306/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 71406 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 14-10-2013
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Unabsorbed depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2306/MUM/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) M/S. NELCO LIMITED DCIT, RANGE - 8(2) MIDC, PLOT NO. EL-6 MUMBAI TTC INDL. AREA, ELECTRONIC ZONE VS. MAHAPE, NAVI MUMBAI 400710 PAN - AACT1983C APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI KETAN VED RESPONDENT BY: SHRI MANVENDRA GOYAL DATE OF HEARING: 14.10.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 14.10.2013 O R D E R PER D. MANMOHAN, V.P. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2012 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-17, MUMBAI AND IT P ERTAINS TO A.Y. 2008-09. 2. IN SHORT, THE ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLE D TO CARRY FORWARD THE UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION FOR SET OFF IN FUTURE YEARS BEYOND A PERIOD OF EIGHT YEARS, WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO AS WELL AS THE CIT(A). 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON FOLLOWING DECISIONS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION TH AT UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION PERTAINING TO A.Y. 1995-96 ONWARDS CAN BE CARRIED FORWARD, IN THE EVENT THAT THEY ARE NOT ABSORBED IN THE SUBSEQU ENT YEARS, AND SET OFF CAN BE CLAIMED IN FUTURE YEARS EVEN AFTER LAPSE OF EIGHT YEARS: - I. GENERAL MOTORS INDIA (P.) LTD. VS. DCIT - 210 TAXMA N 20 (GUJ) II. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD. VS. ADDL. CIT - 22 ITR (AT) 737 (MUM) III. MULTONS PVT. LTD. VS. CIT - ITA NO.3019/MUM/2012DA TED 22.05.2013 ITA NO. 2306/MUM/2012 M/S. NELCO LIMITED 2 4. THE LEARNED D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE ISSUE STA NDS COVERED BY THE AFORECITED DECISIONS THOUGH, HOWEVER, HE SUPPORTED THE STAND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT (SUPRA) WHICH IN TURN WAS FOLLOWED BY THE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH ES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE PLEA RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED AND WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14 TH OCTOBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) (D. MANMOHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT MUMBAI, DATED: 14 TH OCTOBER, 2013 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 17, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT 8, MUMBAI CITY 5. THE DR, B BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI N.P.