Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 833 - AT - Income TaxEligibility of claim under section 10A - AO disallowed assessee's claim since the assessee did not furnish details about new machinery purchased and used in 10A unit. - CIT() allowed claim - Held that:- On going through the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) we find that assessee has purchased machines after approval of STPI. Computers and stentura machines were imported thereafter. The return of income for the assessment year 2001-02 was filed on 28.3.2002 duly accompanied by audit report and report in Form No.56F and deduction under section 10A was claimed as per law. The Assessing Officer in the remand proceedings except stating that assessee has not co-operated in the assessment proceedings has not offered any comments on the grounds preferred by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). None of the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) have been rebutted by the Revenue with evidences. In such circumstances, we uphold the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax. - Decided in favour of assessee. Clim of depreciation - CIT(A) denied depreciation for the reason that assessee has not carried on any business during the year and the assets were not put to use - Held that:- As relying on case of ACIT Vs. Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd. [2009 (8) TMI 970 - ITAT CHENNAI] in order to claim depreciation under s. 32 it is not necessary that the machinery in question should have been actually used in the relevant previous year for the purpose of business and it is sufficient if the same is kept ready for use during the relevant previous year, though not actually used due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control. See. 32 has received several amendments but there is no amendment which has clarified that depreciation would be allowed only if the asset in question was actually used during the relevant previous year and merely keeping ready for being used in the business was not sufficient. When the interpretation of s. 32, especially of the word "used" appearing in that section was the subject-matter of a judgment of the Bombay High Court as long back in 1937 in the old IT Act, the same word which is used in s. 32 of the 1961 Act must receive the same construction. Therefore, the assessee is entitled to the claim of depreciation on the gas sweetening plant which was kept ready for use during the entire previous year, though not actually used due to lack of raw material - Decided in favour of assessee.
|