The ITO, Ward-4(3), Ahmedabad V. M/s. H.K. Finchem Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 2435/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6731 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 02-08-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S A BOHRA
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

ITA.NO.2435/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH,AHM EDABAD. ( BEFORE SHRI D.K. TYAGI AND SHRI A. K. GARODIA) I.T .A. NO. 2435/AHD/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006 -2007 ) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(3), ROM NO.106, 1 ST FLOOR, NAVJEEVAN PRESS BLDG., OFF ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-14. (APPELLANT) VS. M/S. H. K. FINCHEM LTD., 201, 2 ND FLOOR, ANIKET C. G. ROAD, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) PAN: AAACH 5113 Q APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.A. BOHRA, JCIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJAY R. SHAH. ( (( ( )/ )/)/ )/ ORDER PER: SHRI A.K. GARODIA , A.M. THIS IS A REVENUES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. C.I.T.(A)-XX, AHMEDABAD DATED 10-5-2010 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN D ELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.17,90,687/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION. 2. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE DEPRECIATION WAS TO BE ALLOWED ON THE WDV AFTER REDUCI NG THE DEPRECIATION FOR EARLIER YEARS. 3. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREAS IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE T HAT THIS ISSUE ITA.NO.2435/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07 2 IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING TRIBUNAL ORDER AND HENCE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT IT HAS BE EN NOTICED BY THE A.O. THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT CLAIMED ANY DEPRECIATION FOR T HE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING 31-3-2000 AND 31-3-2001 I.E. FOR ASSESSMEN T YEARS 2000-01 AND 2001-02. IT IS ALSO NOTED BY THE A.O. THA T THE DEPRECIATION FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDED 31-3-2002 I .E. A.Y. 2002-03 WAS CLAIMED ON THE BASIS OF WDV OF THE ASSETS AS ON 1-4-199 9.IT IS FURTHER NOTED BY THE A.O. THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002- 03, WDV OF THE ASSETS AS ON 1-4-2001 WAS RE-COMPUTED AFTER REDUCING T HE ALLOWABLE DEPRECIATION FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 AND A .Y. 2001-02 AND ON THE WDV SO ARRIVED, DEPRECIATION WAS ALLOWED I N ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03. IT IS ALSO NOTED BY THE A.O. THAT THE W DV OF THE ASSETS AS ON 31-3-2002 WAS RE-COMPUTED AND THEREAFTER THE DEP RECIATION WAS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS ON THE BASIS OF WDV CALCULATED ON 1-4-2001 WHICH WAS RE-COMPUTED BY REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE DEPRECIATION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 A ND 2001-02. ON THIS BASIS THE A.O. REDUCED THE DEPRECIATION ALLOWABL E TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT YEAR ALSO BY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 17,9 0,687/-. BEING AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT (A) WHO HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF TRIBUNAL DECISION IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002- 03 AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. IT IS NOTED BY LD. C.I.T. (A) IN PARAGRAPH 3.3 OF HIS ORDE R THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALLOWED ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR DEPRECIATION IN ASSESSMENT YE AR 2002-03 AS PER THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN THAT YEAR. T HE LD. A.R. OF ITA.NO.2435/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07 3 THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE US A COPY OF THE TRIBUNAL OR DER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 IN ITA NO.2806/AHD/2006 DATED 6-3-2009 AND ALSO FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2000-01 AND 2005-06 IN ITA. NO.2557. 2487 AND 2559/ AHD/2009 AND CO NO.212 & 214/AHD/2009 DATED 29-4-2011.IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 THAT THE ASSESSEE IS EN TITLED TO DEDUCTION OF THE FULL AMOUNT OF DEPRECIATION OF RS.2,8 6,85,879/- AS HAS BEEN CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IT IS AN ADMITTED P OSITION THAT AS PER THE TRIBUNAL ORDER, IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03, THE ACTION OF THE A.O. OF REDUCING THE WDV AS ON 1-4- 2001 AND ALSO ON 31-3-2002 BY WAY OF REDUCING THE DEP RECIATION IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 AND 2001-02 WAS NOT APP ROVED BY THE TRIBUNAL. HENCE, IN THE PRESENT YEAR ALSO, THE A SSESSEE HAS TO BE ALLOWED DEPRECIATION ON THE BASIS OF SUCH WDV AS ON 1-4-2005 WHICH IS WITHOUT REDUCING THE DEPRECIATION IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 AND 2001-02 FOR WHICH NO DEPRECIATION WA S CLAIMED AND ALLOWED. HENCE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS REQUIRED TO BE DISMISSED. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE OF H EARING I.E. 6-5-2011. SD/- SD/-S (D.K. TYAGI) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER. AC COUNTANT MEMBER. AHMEDABAD. DATED: 6 - 5- 2011. ITA.NO.2435/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07 4 S.A.PATKI. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS)-XX, AHMEDABAD. 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR.,ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHMEDABAD. 1.DATE OF DICTATION - -2011 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING / / 2011 MEMBER.OTHER MEMBER. 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S - -2011. 4.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT - -2011 5.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR .P.S./P.S - -2011 6.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK - -2011. 7.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8.THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSTT. REG ISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 9.DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER..