Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 108 - ITAT PUNEDisallowing the depreciation for the cars AND interest paid on car loan used by the directors - vehicle held in the name of director of the appellant company - AO disallowed both the claims on the ground that the car was held in the name of the director instead of appellant company - HELD THAT:- The vehicle i.e. BMW car is registered in the name of director of the appellant company although the repayment of loan out of which the car was acquired, was made by the appellant company and it was used in the business of the appellant company. The fact that the loan was repaid by the appellant company affirms the position that the appellant company is owner of the vehicle. The fact that the vehicle is registered in the name of the director of the appellant company does not make any difference, inasmuch as, the registration under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is not conclusive evidence of the ownership of the vehicle. The term "ownership" under the Motor Vehicle Act is different from the ownership as envisaged under the provisions of section 32 of the Act as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of I.C.D.S. Ltd.[2013 (1) TMI 344 - SUPREME COURT]. Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Salkia Transport Associates [1982 (9) TMI 28 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] held that there is no requirement under the provisions of section 32 that in order to avail the depreciation, an assessee should be registered the ownership of the vehicle. We are of the considered opinion that the assessee is entitled to the depreciation under the provisions of section 32 of the Act inspite of the fact that the vehicle is registered in the name of the director of the appellant company. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition on account of disallowance of depreciation on car and interest paid on car loan. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|