DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Connaught Plaza Restaurants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 571/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6833 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 07-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. C.M. GARG , JUDICIAL M EMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO . 571 /DEL/ 2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008 - 09 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3(1), NEW DELHI VS. CONNAUGHT PLAZA RESTAURANTS PVT. LTD., 13A, JOR BAGH MARKET, NEW DELHI. (PAN: AAACC1201E ) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY MS. RAKHI VIMAL, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SH. ROHIT GARG, ADV. DATE OF HEARING 07.01.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 10.02.2016 ORDER PER O.P. KANT , A. M. : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21.11.2013 OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) - V, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09, RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 3(1), NEW DELHI IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO FILE APPEAL IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED CASE BEFORE THE ITAT, NEW DELHI ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL. 1. WHETHER THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN HOLD ING THAT POINT OF SALES (POS) SYSTEMS ARE COMPUTERS AND ALLOWING DEPRECIATION @ 60% THEREON IGNORING THE FACT THAT EVERY ELECTRONIC ITEM HAVING MEMORY AND STORAGE CANNOT BE COVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF COMPUTERS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION OF DEPRECIATION @6 0%. 2 ITA NO. 571/DEL/2014, AY: 2008 - 09 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE FOR RESERVING THE RIGHT TO AMEND, MODIFY, ALTER, ADD OR FOREGO ANY GROUND(S) OF APPEAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE OR DUR ING THE HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 2. THE SOLE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS WHETHER THE POINT OF SALES (POS) SYSTEMS ARE SUBJECT TO DEPRECIATION @ 60% OR NOT. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE ABOVE GROUND IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISIONS OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05, 2007 - 08 AND 2009 - 10 IN ITA NOS. 5466/DEL/2013, 5840/DEL/2013, 6441 & 6442/DEL/2013. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THOUGH RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BUT COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE FACT AS THE ISSUE WAS DULY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMI SSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04, THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA N O . 5466/DEL/2013 HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE REVENUE WITH THE FINDINGS, WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 7. KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID FINDING GIVEN BY THE LEARNED FI RST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, IN WHICH HE HAS RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWED THE ORDER DATED 31.08.2010 OF THE HON BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI PASSED IN ITA N O . 1266/2010 IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. RAJDHANI POWERS LTD., WHEREIN ISSUE IN DISPUTE HAS BEEN D ECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE, NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE VALID AND REASONED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. HENCE, WE AFFIRM THE ORDER OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) AND DISMISS THE PRESENT A PPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. 6. THIS ISSUE CAME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 - 05 IN ITA NO. 5840/DEL/2013 WHEN THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN 3 ITA NO. 571/DEL/2014, AY: 2008 - 09 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04 , UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) IN GRANTING DEPRECIATION ON POA @ 60%. IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08 AND 2009 - 10 ALSO THE TRIBUNAL HAS UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE. 7. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF, WE UPH OLD THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AND ALLOW THE DEPRECIATION @ 60% ALLOWED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON THE POINT OF SALES (POS) SYSTEMS. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THE DECISION IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 0 T H FEBRUARY , 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - ( C.M. GARG ) ( O.P. KANT ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 0 T H FEBRUARY , 2016 . RK/ - COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI