The ITO, (Exemptions), Bhavnagar V. Vinay Vihar Kelavani Mandal, Bhavnagar

ITA 519/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5844 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 519/AHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12) ITO (EXEMPTIONS), BHAVNAGAR APPELLANT VS. VINAY VIHAR KELAVANI MANDAL, VALUKA, TALUKA: PALITANA, BHAVNAGAR 364250 RESPONDENT PAN: AAATV1464D / BY REVENUE : SHRI MUDIT NAGPAL, SR. D.R. / BY ASSESSEE : SHRI M. K. PATEL, A.R. /DATE OF HEARING : 13.03.2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.03.2018 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS REVENUES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 A RISES FROM THE CIT(A)- 9, AHMEDABADS ORDER DATED 02.12.2015 IN CASE NO. C IT(A)9/344/EXM./14-15, REVERSING ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION DISALLOWING AS SESSEES DEPRECIATION CLAIM OF RS.46,93,952/- TERMING IT AS A CASE OF DOUBLE DEDUC TION, IN PROCEEDINGS U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. 2. WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT THE REVENUES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE RAISED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT ASSESSEES IMPUGNED DEPRECIATION CLAIM IS NOT A CASE OF DOUBLE DEDUCTION. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEH EMENTLY CONTENDS THAT ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE AMOUNT IN QUESTION INC URRED ON ACQUISITION OF THE ASSETS ITA NO. 519/AHD/16 [ITO (EXEMPTIONS) VS. VINAY VIHA R KELAVANI MANDAL ] A.Y. 2011-12 - 2 - IN QUESTION, IT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR DEPRECIATIONAL RELIEF AS IT AMOUNTS TO A CASE OF DOUBLE DEDUCTION ONLY AS HELD IN HONBLE KERALA HIG H COURTS JUDGMENT IN LISSIE MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS V. CIT (2012) 348 ITR 344 (KER .) AS WELL AS HONBLE APEX COURTS DECISION IN ESCORTS LTD. & ANR. VS. UNION O F INDIA & ORS. (1993) 199 ITR 43 (SC). WE FIND NO MERIT IN REVENUES INSTANT ARG UMENT AS HONBLE APEX COURTS RECENT DECISION IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7186 OF 2014 CI T VS. RAJASTHAN & GUJARATI CHARITABLE FOUNDATION HAS SETTLED THE LAW CONCLUDIN G THEREIN THAT SUCH A DEPRECIATION CLAIM DOES NOT AMOUNT TO DOUBLE DEDUCT ION. THEIR LORDSHIPS FURTHER TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT IN THE ACT IN SECTION 11(6) INSERTED BY THE FINANCE (NO.2) ACT(S), 2014 W.E.F. 01.04.2015 P ROPOSING TO TREAT SUCH A DEPRECIATION CLAIM AS A CASE OF DOUBLE DEDUCTION. REVENUE FAILS TO DISPUTE THE FACT THAT THE SAID AMENDMENT IS NOT APPLICABLE WITH RETR OSPECTIVE EFFECT SINCE WE ARE DEALING WITH ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. WE THEREFORE DRAW SUPPORT FROM HONBLE APEX COURTS ABOVE RECENT DECISION TO AFFIRM CIT(A) S FINDINGS UNDER CHALLENGE. THE REVENUES SOLE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE IS THEREFO RE DECLINED. 3. THIS REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. [PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 16 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018.] SD/- SD/- ( AMARJIT SINGH ) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 16/03/2018 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE ! / CONCERNED CIT 4 !- / CIT (A) ( )*+ ,--. . /0 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1 +23 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / . // . /0