Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 1759 - AT - Income TaxDepreciation on Wind Mills – WEG - Held that:- Whether the installed Wind Mill was new or old would not affect the claim of depreciation as per the provisions of the law. Further we find that the report of the DDIT, Unit-II Coimbatore is self speaking report wherein the Revenue authorities have made a detailed investigation in respect of the erection of Wind Mill Energy in the State of Tamil Nadu. We have no hesitation to hold that the assessee’s claim for purchasing a Wind Mill, erecting the same and generating electricity are fully substantiated. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the claim of depreciation as per the provisions of the law. - Decided in favour of assessee. Depreciation on the Wind Mill installed in the State of Karnataka - AO declined the claim as the land on which the Wind Mill has been erected cannot be owned by the assessee as it belongs to/or the land granted to weaker sections by the Government of Karnataka and Since the assessee does not owned the land, assessee cannot be considered as owner of the WEG - Held that:- A perusal of the record shows that the said land has been taken on lease by M/s. Pioneer Windcon Pvt. Ltd., for a period of 30 years. We also find that The Karnataka Renewable Energy Development Ltd., has approved the power project and there is an agreement between the Department of Energy of Government of Karnataka and the assessee for the installation and supply of electricity to the Government. These facts conclusively established the claim of the assessee for depreciation merely because the assessee is not the owner of the land and the land is a leasehold land would not itself disentitled the assessee with the claim of depreciation. The Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the claim of depreciation and therefore we decline to interfere. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition u/s. 69C - unexplained expenditure - Held that:- except for the admission of one of the Authorised Representative, there is no documentary evidence to suggest that the assessee has incurred cost outside the books of account. Merely on the basis of an unsubstantiated submission cannot lead to the addition u/s. 69C of the Act. The assessee has purchased the land for ₹ 58,500/- and therefore to this extent, the assessee is not entitled for the claim of depreciation. While deleting the addition of ₹ 2,41,500/-, we direct the AO to withdraw the depreciation on the amount of ₹ 58,500/- - Decided partly in favour of assessee. Claim of additional depreciation on the WEG denied - Held that:- The claim of additional depreciation has been correctly denied because the provisions of Sec. 32(1)(iia) has been amended w.e.f. 1l.4.2013 by the Finance Act, 2012. - Decided against assessee
|