BEEKAYLON INDUSTRIES LTD., MUMBAI V. ITO,WARD 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6173/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1582 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-10-2009
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 15-10-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PEEYUSH JAIN
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO 6173/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) BEEKAYLON INDUSTRIES LIMITED, 10, JASVILLE, 9, NEW MARINE LINES, OPP LIBERTY CINEMA, MUMBAI -400 020 PAN: AACCB 0306 R VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1)(1) , MUMBAI APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAKESH JOSHI RESPONDENT BY: SHRI PEEYUSH JAIN ORDER PER PRAMOD KUMAR 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE-APPELLANT HA S CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF CIT (A)S ORDER DATED 25TH AUGUST 2008, FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL ARE WITHOUT PREJUDI CE TO EACH OTHER: 1. THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADD ITION OF RS 75,19,488/- BEING THE REWORKING OF THE ALLOWABLE DEPRECIATION A S PER INCOME TAX ACT 1961 AS IF THE DEPRECIATION HAD BEEN THRUST AND ALLOWED EACH YEAR SINCE AY 1998- 1999 UPTO AY 2001-2002 WITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT TH E HONBLE ITAT HAD ALREADY DECIDED THE SAID ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE APP ELLANT IN ITS OWN CASE FOR THE PAST YEARS BY HOLDING THAT ONLY THE DEPRECIATION CL AIM ONLY ALLOWED IN THE PAST BE REDUCED FROM THE WDV. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVES TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING. 2. THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FAIRLY AGREE THAT TH E ABOVE ISSUE IS NOW SQUARELY COVERED BY DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH HOLDIN G THAT WRITTEN DOWN VALUE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DEPRECIATION, WILL BE ACTUAL L OST OF THE BLOCK OF ASSETS MINUS DEPRECIATION ACTUALLY ALLOWED. OUR ATTENTION IS IN VITED TO VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCHES, INCLUDING DATED 26.8.2008 IN ASSE SSEES OWN CASE FOR THE BEEKAYLON INDUSTRIES LIMITED 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, HOLDING SO. LEARNED DEPAR TMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT DISPUTE THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY ORDERS OF CO-ORDINATE BENCHES, BUT HE VEHEMENTLY RELIES UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW AND SUBMITS THAT WHEN CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION IS ADMITTEDLY MANDATORY ADMIS SIBLE DEPRECIATION CLAIM SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING WDV VALUE OF ASSET ON WHICH DEPRECIATION IS TO BE COMPUTED. 3. WE ARE IN CONSIDERED AGREEMENT WITH THE VIEWS OF OUR CO-ORDINATE BENCH, AND SEE NO REASONS TO DEVIATE FROM THE SAME. FOR THE P URPOSE OF COMPUTING DEPRECIATION, WRITTEN DOWN VALUE IS TO BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF DEPRECIATION ACTUALLY ALLOWED AND NOT ON THE BASIS OF NOTIONAL D EPRECIATION WHICH IS ALLOWABLE. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WERE CLEARLY IN ERROR IN TAKING I NTO ACCOUNT DEPRECIATION WHICH WAS ADMISSIBLE BUT HAS NOT BEEN, EVEN IF WRONGLY, ALLOW ED. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO MODIFY THE ADMISSIBLE DEPRECIATION ON THE ABOVE BASIS. THE ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 27TH OCT OBER 2009. SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 27TH OCTOBER 2009 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A)-I, MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT, -I, MUMBAI. BEEKAYLON INDUSTRIES LIMITED 3 5) THE D.R. B BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSTT. REGISTRAR CHAVAN* I.T.A.T., MUMBAI BEEKAYLON INDUSTRIES LIMITED 4 SR.N. EPISODE OF AN ORDER DATE INITIALS CONCERNED 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 26.10.09 SR.PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 26.10.09 SR.PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS SR.PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER