, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : CHENNAI . , ! '# $ , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P.NO. 120/CHNY/2018 ( I.T.A.NO.1972/CHNY/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 ) M/S.CHENNAI RADHA ENGINEERING WORKS PVT. LTD., 40,SAPTHAGIRI COLONY, JAFFERKHANPET,CHENNAI 600 083. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI. [PAN AACCC 6068 R] ( $% / APPELLANT) ( &'$% /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.N.VIJAYAKUMAR,C.A /RESPONDENT BY : MR.R.CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, ADDITIONAL CIT D.R / DATE OF HEARING : 24 - 0 8 - 201 8 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 - 0 8 - 201 8 ( / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER MP NO.120/CHNY/2018 IS A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN I TA NO.1972/CHNY/2017 DATED 03.11.2017. MP NO.120/CHNY/18 :- 2 -: 2. MR.N.VIJAYAKUMAR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, AND MR.R.CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE O F ASSESSEE THAT IN THE PAGE NO.3 OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATE D 03.11.2017 HAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:- THAT, THEREFORE, THE ASSETS UNDER REFERENCE ARE BE ING USED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AN D TRADING IN TIPPER, ETC., IS NOT IN DOUBT. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEES BUSINESS WA S NOT TRADING IN TIPPER , BUT AS HAS BEEN EXTRACTED IN PARA-2 OF THE ORDER AS FOLLOWS:- 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF COMPONENTS AND SPARES FOR CONVEYOR SYSTEMS, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF CONVEYOR SYST EMS AT THERMAL POWER STATIONS, PORTS, AND POWER GENERAT ION UNITS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE O RDER OF TRIBUNAL IN PAGE NO.3, WHICH REQUIRES RECTIFICATION. THUS, THE LD.A.R PRAYED THAT THE WORDS IN TIPPER, ETC., IN THE THIRD PAGE O F THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL MAY BE DELETED. 4. IN REPLY, LD.D.R RAISED NO OBJECTION. MP NO.120/CHNY/18 :- 3 -: 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ADMIT TEDLY, AN ERROR HAS BEEN CREPT IN THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN RE SPECT OF NATURE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE IN PAGE-3 OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 03.11.2017. CONSEQUENTLY, THE SAME STANDS RECTIFIED AND PAGE-3 OF THE LAST PARAGRAPH READS AS FOLLOWS:- THERE IS NO DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE ASSESSEES B USINESS, SO THAT IT IS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF HIRING OUT OF MOT OR CARS/LORRIES, OR OTHERWISE HIRING THEM TO THIRD PARTIES, OR EVEN IN THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORTATION OF GOODS. THAT, THEREFORE, THE ASSETS UNDER REFERENCE ARE BEING USED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BUS INESS OF MANUFACTURING AND TRADING IS NOT IN DOUBT. UNDER THESE PRIMARY, UNDISPUTED FACTS, ON WHAT BASIS, WE WONDER, DOES TH E ASSESSEE CLAIM DEPRECIATION AT A HIGHER RATE, WHICH IS ONLY WHERE THE RELEVANT ASSETS ARE USED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING THEM ON HIRE. THE POSITION STANDS CLARIFIED BY THE CBDT VIDE ITS CIRCULAR NO.652 SUPRA AND, AT ANY RATE, ATTAINING FINALITY PER THE DECISION IN GUPTA GLOBAL EXIM (P.) LTD.(SUPRA). WE ARE, THEREFORE, I N COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH THE ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL AND, ACCOR DINGLY, UPHELD THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE ADDITIONAL DEPRECIAT ION OF 15 PERCENT ON THE RELEVANT ASSETS. WE DECIDE ACCORDING LY. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. MP NO.120/CHNY/18 :- 4 -: 6. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CONCLUSIO N OF HEARING ON 24 TH AUGUST, 2018, AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( $% . '(') ) ( ABRAHAM P GEORGE) ! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( $ ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ) ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER + / CHENNAI ,- / DATED: 24 TH AUGUST, 2018. K S SUNDARAM . / 01 2 1' / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. . . 3 () / CIT(A) 5. 156 78 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. . . 3 / CIT 6. 69) : / GF