DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s SSP Aviation Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5698/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86854 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 02-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 22-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D.AGRAWAL , V.P. AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, J.M. ITA NO. 5698 / DEL/20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 10 - 11 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 18 VS. SSP AVIATION LTD. NEW DELHI (FORMERLY M/S SSP PROPERTIES PVT.LTD.) 17 - B, MGF HOUSE, ASAF ALI ROAD NEW DELHI 110 002 PAN: AAHCS 8024 N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY : - SH. BRR KUMAR, SR.D.R. RESPONDENT BY : - NONE . O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K , JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(APPEALS) - III, NEW DELHI D T. 12.8.2013 , PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 10 - 11. 2. THE SOLITARY ISSUE THAT IS RAISED IS WHETHER THE CIT(APPEALS) IS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING DEPRECIATION ON AIR CRAFT AT 40% AS AGAINST 1 5 % ALLOWED BY THE A.O. 3 . THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY . IT HAD CLAIMED DEPRECIATION @ 40% ON THE AIR CRAFT. THE A.O. ALLOWED THE DEPRECIATION @ 15% INST EAD OF 40% CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AND MADE A DISALLOWANCE TO THE TUNE OF RS.9,38,44,277/ - . THE A.O. WAS OF THE OPINION 40% IS TO BE ALLOWED ONLY ON AIR CRAFT ENGINE AND NOT ON THE ENTIRE AIR CRAFT. THE AO TREATED THE AIR CRAFT AS PLANT AND MACHINERY AND ACCORDINGLY GRANTED DEPRECIATION @ 15%. 4 . AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE CIT(A) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR T HE A.Y. 2009 - 10 IN ITA NO.473/2013 ( ORDER DT. 31.07.2013 ) . 2 5 . THE REVEN U E BEING AGGRIEVED IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6 . WE HAVE HEARD THE LD.SR.D.R. NONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE NOTICE TH AT AN IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED IN THE ASSESSE E S OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2009 - 10. THE CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF THE I T AT REFERRED (SUPRA). THE ITAT S ORDER IN THE ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2009 - 10 HAS NOT BEEN REVERSED BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURT. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE C IT(A) AS CORRECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 7 . IN THE RESULT THE REVENUE S APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02 ND MARCH, 2015 . SD/ - SD/ - (G.D.AGRAWAL) (GEORGE GEORGE K) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: THE 02 ND MARCH, 2015 *MANGA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT(A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR