Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (5) TMI 131 - AT - Income TaxDepreciation on leased assets - Regarding Sale lease back - Held that:- We are of the opinion that the assessee is entitled for the claim of depreciation under all the three circumstance, i.e. Sale lease back, genuineness of transaction and asset having being put to use. We, therefore, allow ground no. 1 the assessee's appeal and dismiss both the grounds of the department's appeal. Disallowance on account of capital in nature - Held that:- we are of the view that getting the SPNS facility is of an enduring nature, with which not only the banks are hooked to each other, but, a great amount of facility is provided to the customers, . With acquiring this facility, so far as the assessee is concerned it is definitely of an enduring nature, for which, we are of the opinion, the assessee bank is entitled to get depreciation - The assessee's appeal is thus partly allowed. Regarding disallowance of stamp duty - Held that:- we find that the assessee had added back the expense in its computation. Since the amount has already been added back, the revenue authorities erred in making a further disallowance, which has resulted in the double disallowance - set aside the order of the CIT(A) - This ground is allowed. Regarding disallowance for membership :- The amount paid towards corporate membership is an expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business and not towards capital account as it only facilitates smooth and efficient running of a business enterprise - - set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to delete the disallowanc - Appeal was allowed. Regarding disallowance of depreciation claimed premises acquired by the assessee - Held that:- It is not disputed that the property was repossessed from tenant after paying it off, and it is for the betterment of title of a capital asset, therefore, the expense has to be held to be of capital in nature we, set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to allow depreciation as per law after verification of the dates of payment for repossession - the tenanted property cannot be held to be used by the assessee for the purposes of its business. Regarding levy of interest u/s 234A - Held that:- Placing reliance on the cited cases and the decision of Collector, Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji and others, reported in 167 ITR 471, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court observes, "When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred,........", the Hon'ble Court further observes, "There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of malafides - Set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to cancel the interest - Appeal is filed by the assessee is partly allowed - Appeal filed by the department is dismissed.
|