ACIT,CIR-1(2), Pune V. Inox Air Products Ltd.,Office NO 4, Pune

ITA 675/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 67524514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 02-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANN KAPTHUAMA
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER , AND SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA.NO.675/PN/2012 (ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08) ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE. .. APPELLANT VS. INOX AIR PRODUCTS LTD., OFFICE NO.4, 1 ST FLOOR, SOLITAIRE, PUNE NAGAR ROAD, NEAR AGHA KHAN PALACE, PUNE 411006. PAN: AAACI5569D .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.H.NANIWADEKAR DEPARTMENT BY : MS.ANN KAPTHUAMA DATE OF HEARING : 17.04.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.04.2013 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEA RNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN ALLOW ING THE DEPRECIATION RATE @ 60% INSTEAD OF 15% IN THE CASE OF DEPRECIATION ON STORAGE TANKS/COLD CONVERTER/TRANSP ORT TANK ERRONEOUSLY CONSIDERING THESE TO BE GAS CYLIND ERS, THERE BY CONTRAVENING THE GUIDELINES GIVEN UNDER RU LE 5 OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEA RNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) GROSSLY ERRED WHILE GRANTING DEPRECIATION @ 60% BY RELYING UPON THE ORD ER OF THE ITAT IN ASSESSEE CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2000-01 AGAI NST WHICH AN APPEAL IS FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT WHICH IS STILL PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF THE T RIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.939/PN/2011 FOR A.Y. 2006-07 2 WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS GRANTED RELIEF BY DISMISSI NG THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON SIMILAR ISSUE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 4. AFTER HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES, IN OUR VI EW THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ALLOWING DEPRECIATION @ 60% ON THE ST ORAGE TANKS/COLD CONVERTERS, TRANSPORT TANKS, CANNOT BE F AULTED WITH AS THE SAME IS IN LINE WITH THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON 'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR TH E A.Y. 2000-01 DATED 09.01.2012 (SUPRA). MOREOVER, THE LD . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED IN ANY MANNER THAT THE PRECEDENT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CAS E HAVE BEEN REVERSED BY ANY HIGHER AUTHORITY. 5. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID, WE HEREBY AFFIRM THE O RDER OF THE CIT(A) AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. NOTHING CONTRARY WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE. FAC TS BEING SIMILAR, SO FOLLOWING THE SAME REASONING, WE HOLD T HAT THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING DEPRECIATION @ 60% ON THE STORAGE TANKS/COLD CONVERTERS, TRANSPORT TANKS. THIS VIEW IS FORTIFIED BY THE DECISION OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. 3. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 25 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2013. SD/- SD/- ( R.K.PANDA ) ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YAD AV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER GSPS PUNE, DATED THE 25 TH APRIL, 2013 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO: 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), PUNE. 3. THE CIT(A)-I, PUNE. 4. THE CIT-I, PUNE. 5. THE DR A BENCH, PUNE. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE.