ITO (E) II(1), MUMBAI V. THE WATCH TOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF INDIA, MUMBAI

ITA 5411/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3718 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: CULLA MUMBAI PANGIR NO AAATT D
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BE NCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / I .TA NO. 5411/MUM/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 THE ITO (E) - II(1), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, LALBAUG, PAREL, MUMBAI-400 012 / VS. THE WATCH TOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF INDIA, 167, SHETH MOTISHAH ROAD, BYCULLA, MUMBAI-400 027 ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. AAATT 0149D ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY: SHRI S. SENTHIL KUMARAN / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI MANDAR VAIDYA / DATE OF HEARING :16.03.2016 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :29.04.2016 / O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, JM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-1, MUMBAI DATED 16.06.2014 PERTAINING TO AS SESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APP EAL: 1 . WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION OF RS.1,91,56,284/- AS DEDUCTION ON FI XED ASSETS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE CAPITAL EXPE NDITURE INCURRED ON ACQUIRING THE ASSETS HAS ALREADY BEEN C LAIMED AS ITA NO. 5411/M/14 2 APPLICATION OF INCOME U/ S.11 OF THE 1. T. ACT, 196 1 IN THE CURRENT OR PAST YEARS'. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), MUMBAI ERRED IN NOT APP RECIATING THE FACT THAT ALLOWING OF DEPRECIATION WILL RESULT IN D OUBLE DEDUCTION WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON 'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ESCORTS LTD. VS. UNION OF INDI A 199 ITR 43 AND J. K SYNTHETICS LTD. VS. UNION OF INDIA (1992) 65 T AXMAN 420.' 3. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY T HE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 4283/M/2011 DATED 6.6.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 HOLDING THAT ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR DEPRECIATION ON THE AMOUNTS WHICH WERE ALREADY CLAIMED AS APPLICATION OF INCOME U/S 11 OF THE ACT. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT THIS DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN AFFIRMED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT IN INCOME T AX APPEAL NO. 1548 OF 2012 DATED 10.12.2014 WHEREIN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. HE FURNISHED COPIES OF ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL AND ALSO THE HONBLE HIGH COURT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 FOR OUR PERUSAL. 4. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE PLACES RELIA NCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH T HE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH AS WELL AS THE HIGH COURT IN ASSE SSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE ISSUE IN HAND HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITL ED FOR CLAIM OF ITA NO. 5411/M/14 3 DEPRECIATION ON PRINTING MACHINERY & EQUIPMENTS, CO MPUTERS ETC. THE TRIBUNAL ALSO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO EL IGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S. 11 ON SUCH AMOUNTS AS APPLICATION OF INCOME, W HICH DECISION HAS BEEN AFFIRMED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY B Y DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISION, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR THIS ASSESSM ENT YEAR ALSO. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH APRIL, 2016. SD/- SD/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (C.N. PRASAD ) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ %' /JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; (' DATED : 29 TH APRIL, 2016 . % . ./ RJ , SR. PS !'#$#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ) ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. ) / CIT 5. *+ ,%%-. , -.! , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. , /01 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, *% //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI