Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (7) TMI 1065 - AT - Income TaxAdditional depreciation on windmill – Held that:- Assessee has installed a Windmill during the year - CIT(A) while deciding the issue has given a finding that the Assessee is already engaged in the business of manufacturing of production of Pipes and Tubes and has also fulfilled all the conditions laid down for claim of additional depreciation – Relying upon CIT vs. Diamines and Chemicals Ltd. [2013 (12) TMI 373 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - while claiming the deduction u/s 32(1)(iia) setting up Windmill has nothing to do with the power industry and what is required to be satisfied in order to claim additional depreciation is that setting up of new machinery or plant should have been acquired and installed by an Assessee who was already engaged in the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing - assessee is already engaged in the business of manufacturing and the Assessee has installed a windmill during the year and there was no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) – Decided against Revenue. Foreign exchange hedging loss - Assessee not entered into any forward contracts - Loss notional in character – Held that:- Assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing Tubes and Pipes. From the copy of the balance sheet placed on record it is seen that the approximately 90% of the material consumed is from import purchases - assessee has availed financial facilities from its bankers for purchase of raw material - CIT(A) while allowing the appeal of the Assessee has given a finding that the dealing of Assessee in foreign exchange was in the normal course of business and to safeguard the future losses against foreign exchange rate fluctuations it had entered into hedging transaction - the loss falls under proviso (a) to Section 43(5) of the Act and the loss on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange in forward contract was not speculative transaction but is a business loss covered by Section 28 of the Act - the AO has failed to bring any material evidence on record to support its stand that the loss suffered by the Assessee was speculative loss – the decision in CIT Versus M/s Woodward Governor India P. Ltd. & M/s Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. [2009 (4) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT] – there was no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) – Decided against Revenue.
|