Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 839 - AT - Income TaxDepreciation on apple ipad - at the general rate of 15% OR 60% - whether the iPad falls in the definition of computer or mobile phone? - whether the definition of computer given under the information technology Act can be utilised for the purpose of providing the depreciation to the computers under the income tax act or not? - HELD THAT:- Predominate purpose of iPad is a communication and not a computing device, as its main features are email, whatspp, Facetime calls, calls, music, films etc though iPad may discharge some of the functions of computers. In our view iPad is not a substitution of computer/laptop, which have various utilities/functions, though some functions may be common with Ipad. In common parlance also, iPad is considered as communicating device with the some additional features of computer and lastly Apple store do not sell Ipad as computer device rather it is selling it as communicating/entertainment devise. Another reason for holding that the iPad is a communication device, as it is having IMEA number, though assessee had denied to have IMEI number, in the subject matter of iPad, however no concrete evidence has been produced on record in this regard. Lastly we are also of the opinion that in case the assessee wishes to claim that iPad is a computer and is required to have depreciation at the higher rate, then in our opinion, the onus is on the assessee to prove that the assessee is entitled to higher depreciation and merely on the basis of deduction/assumption it cannot be held that the iPad is computer. Hence iPad is not a computer, hence depreciation at low rate is applicable. Hence this ground of the assessee is dismissed. Disallowance of foreign travelling expenses @ 5% (excluding air ticket & visa fee) - HELD THAT:- Admittedly some vouchers for the expenditure incurred by the assessee was missing and as such the lower authorities have taken a view of restricting the expenditure to 5%. In our considered opinion the expenditure restricted by the lower authority, in the absence of the supporting document was reasonable and no interference is called for at available.In the result the appeal of the assessee is devoid of merit in the same is dismissed.
|