MEDIA CONTENT & COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES ( INDIA) P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT 6(3), MUMBAI

ITA 6759/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 62522 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-06-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 23-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JI TENDRA YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: JITENDRA SAKARIA
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, PRESIDENT & SHRI I.P.BANSAL (J.M) ITA NO. 6759/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05) M/S. MEDIA CONTENT & COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., C/O. MAHESH PATIRA & CO., 209-A, RIZVI CHAMBERS-1, 2 ND FLOOR, HILL ROAD, BANDRA(W), MUMBAI - 400 050. PAN:AADCM 0507A (APPELLANT) VS. THE ACIT - 6(3), MUMBAI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI JITENDRA SAKARIA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JITENDRA YADAV DATE OF HEARING : 30/05/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06/06/2012 ORDER PER I.P.BANSAL, J.M THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY CIT(A)-12, MUMBAI DATED 30/6/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESEE IN THIS APPEAL IS REGARDING RATE OF DEPRECATION ON UPS. 2. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE DEPRECIATION @ 60% IS ALLOWABLE ON THE UPS AS IT IS A NECESSARY AND INTEGRAL PART OF THE COMPU TER. THE CIT(A) DID NOT ACCEPT SUCH CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. A.R MAINLY PLACED REL IANCE ON THE FOLLOWING TWO DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT: (1) CIT VS. BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD., I.T APPEAL NO. 1267 DECISION DATED 31 ST AUGUST, 2010, IN WHICH IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT DEPREC IATION IS ALLOWABLE @ ITA NO. 6759/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05) 2 60% ON COMPUTER ACCESSORIES AND PERIPHERALS SUCH A S PRINTERS, SCANNERS, AND SERVER ETC. BEING INTEGRAL PART OF THE COMPUTER SYSTEM. (2) CIT VS. ORIENT CERAMICS & INDUSTRIES LTD. (20 11) 56 DTR (DEL) 397, IN WHICH UPS HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIA TION @ 60%. THIS WAS SO HELD BASED ON THE BASIS OF DECISION IN THE CASE OF BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD (SUPRA) 4. THE LD. A.R HAS PLACED COPY OF BOTH THE DECISIO NS IN THE PAPER BOOK AND A COPY WAS ALSO GIVEN TO LD. D.R. BASED ON T HE AFOREMENTIONED DECISIONS LD. A.R CONTENTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR 60% DEPRECATION ON UPS. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. D.R THAT THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ORIENT CERAMICS & INDUSTRIES LTD.(SUPRA) IS BASED ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BSES YAMUNA P OWER LTD.(SUPRA). HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BSES YAMUNA POWER LTD.(SUPRA) THE ISSUE WAS NOT REGARDING DEPRECIATION ON UPS. THERE FORE, LD. D.R SUBMITTED THAT UPS IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION @ 60%, T HEREFORE, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE DISMISSED. 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ORIENT CERAMICS & INDUSTRIES LT D.(SUPRA) HAS CLEARLY DESCRIBED THAT UPS IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION @ 60%. THE OBSERVATIONS OF THEIR LORDSHIPS FROM THE SAID DECISION ARE REPROD UCED AS UNDER: 13. THE THIRD ISSUE PERTAINING TO DEPRPECIATION O N UPS ARISES ONLY IN THE ASST. YR. 2005-06. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DE PRECIATION ON UPS @ 60 PER CENT WHEREAS THE AO HAD ALLOWED IT @ 25 PE R CENT AND ON THIS BASIS, DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,470 WAS MADE. THE ISS UE NOW STANDS COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT IN THE CASE O F CIT VS. BSES YAMUNA POWERS LTD. ( IT APPEAL NO.1267 DECIDED ON 3 1 ST AUG.2010) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE DEPRECATION @ 60 PER C ENT ON SUCH ITEMS SHALL BE ALLOWED. ITA NO. 6759/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05) 3 7. NO CONTRARY DECISION HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NO TICE, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISIONS OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT WE ALLOW THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHI CH RAISED ONLY ONE ISSUE REGARDING DEPRECIATION ON UPS. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 6 TH DAY OF JUNE 2012 SD/- SD/- ( G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA ) (I.P.BANSAL) PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 6 TH JUNE 2012 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CITY CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 5. THE D.RB BENCH. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, I TAT, MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI. VM.