Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 1122 - AT - Income TaxRate of depreciation on Electric Installation used in factory premises to operate various Machinery & Equipments in manufacturing of POY and polyester chips - Held that:- As decided in favour of assessee's own case [2014 (12) TMI 677 - ITAT MUMBAI] held that the electrical fittings in the instant case should be considered as plant and machinery and hence the depreciation should be allowed at the rate of 25% to plant and machinery - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) - Held that:- As decided in assessee's own case [2014 (12) TMI 677 - ITAT MUMBAI] AR submitted that the assessee had used the internal cash accruals for funding the above said projects and the availability of its own funds could be proved to the AO by showing the balance sheet of the assessee. Accordingly, he requested that this matter may be set aside to the file of the AO so that the assessee would be able to demonstrate about the availablility of its own funds, to which the Ld DR also did not object. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld CIT (A) and restore this issue to the file of AO with a direction to examine this issue afresh by considering the information and explanation that may be furnished by the assessee and take appropriate decision in accordance with law Disallowance u/s 40A(2)(b) - Held that:- We direct the AO to compute the disallowance @ 6% of the aggregate purchase value of the purchases made from Arya Industries - Decided in favour of assessee in part Allowablility of the claim u/s 35D - Held that:- The assessee brought our attention to the additional ground filed before us for the first time making an alternate claim seeking relief u/s 37(1) of the Act. In this regard, Ld Representatives of both the parties mentioned that this issue raised in ground no.4 needs to be remanded to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after admitting the said additional ground. Disallowance of alternate claim of depreciation when the rentals were not allowed - Held that:- As relying on assessee's own case [2014 (12) TMI 677 - ITAT MUMBAI] We notice it is held that the AO has denied the benefit of depreciation also on the ground that the assessee is not the owner of the asset as per the lease agreement. There is a fallacy in the said decision. Once the AO has held that this was a case of finance transaction by ignoring the lease agreement, in our view, he should not refer to the very same lease agreement to decide about the ownership. Accordingly, we are of the view that the assessee should be allowed depreciation benefit. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|