KAPOOR GLASS INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO 6(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 6269/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4507 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 09-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Additional depreciation
• Section: 32; 154

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN , AM AND AMARJIT SINGH , JM ./ I.T.A. NO . 6269 / MUM/ 201 1 ( / ASSESSMENT YEA R : 200 6 - 07 ) KAPOOR GLASS INDIA PVT.LTD., A - 37, KAPOOR HOUSE, MAHAKALI CAVES ROAD, ROAD NO.2, MIDC, ANDHERI(E), MUMBAI - 400093 / VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER 6 (2)(4),, ROOM NO.513, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI - 400020 ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ./ ./PAN. : AACCK0778Q / APPELLANT BY SHRI SHEKHAR GUPTA / RESPONDENT BY SHRI GANESH BARE / DATE OF HEARING : 11.1.20 16 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11 .1.2016 / O R D E R P ER B R BASKARAN,AM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 7.7.2011 PASSED BY LD CIT (A) - 12, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 6 - 07 . 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD.CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE AO IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH A PETITION FILED U/S 154 OF THE ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE THE CLAIM F OR DEDUCTION OF ADD ITIONAL DEPRECIATION IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY IT AND IT FILED A RECTIFICATION APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT SEEKING DEDUCTION OF THE SAME. ITA NO 6269 / MUM/ 201 1 2 THE AO REJECTED THE PETITION OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECO RD WARRANTING ACCEPTANCE OF THE CLAIM PUT FORTH BY THE ASSESSEE . THE LD.CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWABLE AS PER THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS OF ACT . BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S STEEL STRIPS LTD (2011) 11 TAXMANN.COM 361 (PUNJ & HAR), THE LD AR SUBMITTED THAT OVERLOOKING OF STATUTORY PR OVISIONS IS CLEARLY MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AND HENCE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 154 OF THE ACT IS ADMISSIBLE. HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF BANGALORE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF RAKESH SINGH V/S ACIT (2 013) 152 TTJ (BANG) 46 AND SUBMITTED THAT APPELLATE AUTHORITY IS DUTY BOUND TO CONSIDER THE CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION MADE FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE HIM. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE CLAI M OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SAME. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTE D THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CLAIM THE ADDITIONAL DEPRECIATION IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME AND HENCE IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SUFFERS FROM A MIST AKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. ACCORDINGLY HE SUBMITTED TAX AUTHORITIES ARE JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE RECTIFICATION PETITION FILED U/S 154 OF THE ACT . 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY DISPUTE THAT THE ADD ITIONAL DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A STATUTORY DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 32 OF THE ACT. THE HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF STEEL STRIPS LTD ITA NO 6269 / MUM/ 201 1 3 (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT OVERLOOKING OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS IS CLEARLY A M ISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. IT IS ALSO SETTLED PROPOSITION OF LAW THAT THE AO IS REQUIRED TO ASSESS THE CORRECT TOTAL INCOME AND HENCE HE HAS REQUIRED TO ALLOW ALL ADMISSIBLE STATUTORY DEDUCTION S . HENCE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE TAX AUTHORITIES AR E NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE AO TO CONSIDER THE RECTIFICATION PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS BY DULY CONSIDERING THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE HONBLE PUNJ AB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN STEEL STRIPS LTD (SUPRA) REFERRED ABOVE. 6 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY ON 11TH JAN UARY , 2016 . 11 TH JANUARY, 2016 SD SD ( AMARJIT SINGH ) ( B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI: 11TH JANUARY, 201 6 . . . ./ SRL , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - CONCERNED 4. / CIT CONCERNED 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , /ITAT, MUMBAI