ACIT, Coimbatore V. M/s. Sheela Clinic, Coimbatore

ITA 480/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5018 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Additional depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH A BEFORE DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 480/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-II, COIMBATORE. VS. M/S. SHEELA CLINIC, 46, EAST POWER HOUSE ROAD, COIMBATORE 641012. PAN AAHFS 8304 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR O R D E R PER DR. O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2007-08. THE APPEAL IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I , AT COIMBATORE DATED 29.12.2010 AND ARISES OUT OF THE A SSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SEC.143[3] OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1 961. ITA 480/11 :- 2 -: 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS AP PEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN GRANTING ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROU ND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF GENERATION O F ELECTRICITY. IT IS THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING A HOSPITAL ALONE. 3. THE ABOVE CONTENTION OF THE REVENUE IS NOT SUSTA INABLE IN LAW, IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE MAD RAS HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. VTM LTD. (319 ITR 336). IN THE SAID DECISION, THE HON'BLE HI GH COURT HAS HELD THAT AN ASSESSEE WHICH WAS A MANUFACTURING TEX TILE UNIT, WHEN SET UP A WINDMILL WAS ENTITLED TO ADDITIONAL D EPRECIATION. THE ABOVE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IS APP LICABLE TO THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRM ITY IN THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IN GRAN TING ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION IN WINDMILL BUSINESS. 4. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DI SMISSED. ITA 480/11 :- 3 -: ORDER PRONOUNCED ON MONDAY, THE 30 TH DAY OF MAY, 2011 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (GEORGE MATHAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER (DR. O.K.NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT CHENNAI, DATED : 30 TH MAY, 2011 MPO* COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR