Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 1366 - ITAT KOLKATAAdditional depreciation on plant & machinery - D.R. submitted that plant and machinery by its very nature did not include electrical installation therefore, according to him, additional depreciation could not be allowed on plant and machinery - HELD THAT:- There is no dispute that assessee was engaged in manufacture of jute and paper related goods. Items on which depreciation is not allowable have been specifically set out in the proviso. Electrical installation does not fall within any of the provisos. Further definition of ‘plant’ given in section 43(3) of the Act is inclusive and even ships, vehicles, and books are considered as plant. If that be so, electrical installation is definitely part of a plant. In our opinion, ld. CIT(Appeals) was justified in allowing this claim of assessee. Decided against revenue Belated payments of Employees’ contribution to Provident Fund and ESI - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT –vs.-Vijay Shree Ltd. [2011 (9) TMI 30 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] had held that amendment to second proviso to section 43B of the Act, as introduced by Finance Act, 2003 was curative and retrospectively applied from 1st April, 1988, relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Alom Extrusions Limited [2009 (11) TMI 27 - SUPREME COURT] . Their Lordships held that Employees’ contribution paid beyond due date prescribed under Provident Fund Act and Rules were also deductible if the amounts were remitted prior to the due date of filing of the return. Interest on loan given to subsidary company - HELD THAT:- Whenever a cheque issued by a party is cleared through a Bank loan account, the dues to the Bank will increase. If the cheque is cleared out of a deposit account, the dues from the Bank will be decreased. This arithmetics by itself will not show that money had gone out of interest bearing funds. Assessee has clearly pointed out that the cash credit balance had gone down over the relevant previous year. In other words, the cash credit account stood replenished by more than what was given out as advance, through deposits made by the assessee during the relevant previous year. Assessee had substantial profits during the relevant previous year and, therefore, there is much strength in its arguments that loans did not go out of any interest bearing funds. In any case, the loans were given only to a subsidiary of the assessee and Assessing Officer has not doubted the commercial expediency of such loans. We are, therefore, of the opinion that ld. CIT(Appeals) was justified in deleting this addition - Revenue appeal dismissed.
|