Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1702 - ITAT KOLKATADepreciation on tippers - @30% OR @ 15% on the vehicles - assessee being a civil contractor, had to deploy various kinds of plant and machinery which includes several machines like JCB, Excavator etc. and goods transport vehicles like tippers for carrying raw materials etc. to different sites across the country - HELD THAT:- Tippers are vehicles and are registered under the Motor Vehicle Act,1988. A.O. could not bring any material on record, to dispute the assessee’s claim, that the vehicles and other equipments were deployed in difficult areas and therefore, entitle to higher rate of depreciation. The A.O’s contention, that the explanation given by the assessee, is an afterthought, and that no hiring charges have been received, is not supported by facts. The tippers used by the assessee in its business are registered under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. They met the functional test as the basis for grant of 30% depreciation, and also on the ground that the higher depreciation is on account of rigorous and hard use of commercial vehicles, in comparison to the stationery and permanently installed machinery. These views, find support in the decision in the case of CIT vs. Rakesh Jain [2012 (5) TMI 7 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT] . Therefore, addition made by AO, on account of additional depreciation claim on higher rate,should be deleted.That being so, we decline to interfere with the order of Id. C.I T.(A) in deleting the aforesaid addition. Addition being deduction from the secured loan and deletion of hire purchase suspense account - A.O. has added back hire purchase interest suspense - HELD THAT:- In the balance sheet as on 31.03.2011, hire purchase interest suspense account has been deducted from amount of term loan for disclosure compliance of schedule V1 of the Companies Act, 1956 and the same is supported by the audit report and certification of the Auditor. Therefore, we are of the view that the said amount of ₹ 36.00,000/- does not represent income. It is just re-grouped, reworked, re-arranged, reclassification of the figures in the balance sheet of the assessee for the purpose of presentation in the balance sheet and no any unaccounted money was introduced by the assessee company. Hence, after a careful consideration of the submission of the ld Counsel and relevant assessment records, the addition of ₹ 36,00,000-, made by AO on account of hire purchase interest suspense account is not justified. The asset side of the balance sheet and liability side of the balance sheet both are diagnosed and we note that this is just an accounting entry and presentation in the balance sheet therefore, addition made by the Assessing Officer needs to be deleted. That being so, we decline to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A), on this issue, his order is hereby upheld and grounds of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed.
|