Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (11) TMI 161

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ome-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making disallowance of Rs.9,05,766/- on account of higher depreciation claimed on machines purchased under TUF scheme of the Govt. 2. Facts in brief as emerged from the corresponding assessment order passed u/s.143(3) dated 18.12.2008 were that the assessee-company is in the business of manufacturing of texturised yarn. The assessee has claimed depreciation @ 50% on plant & machinery, however, as per AO the eligible rate of depreciation was 25% only. The assessee has informed that the machinery was purchased under Technology Upgradation Fund Scheme (in short TUFS), hence eligible for higher rate of depreciation. However, the AO was not convinced thus according .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... immediate preceding year at 1.08%. According to AO, although there was no change in the process of manufacturing or in the quality of yarn produced, but there was no justification given that why the Oil gain had reduced from 1.08% of the past year to 0.22% for the year under consideration. The difference between the two percentages was computed at 0.86% and, accordingly, an addition of Rs.4,23,037/- was made. The matter was carried before the first appellate authority. Before the first appellate authority, it was contested that the fall in percentage in Oil gain was due to the use of high speed machine which consumes lower oil in comparison to the older machines. It was also contested that the day-today purchase, consumption, production and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... il consumption. The argument of ld.AR is that the complete record of the consumption and the production had been maintained by this assessee and there was no rejection of books of account, therefore the book result ought to have been accepted.   6. On the other hand, from the side of the Revenue, ld. Sr. DR Mr. Rahul kumar appeared and argued that the drastic fall in the oil gain could not be explained by the assessee, therefore the AO had no option but to apply the same percentage of oil gain for the year under consideration. 7. Having heard the submissions of both the sides and on due consideration of the case laws cited, we have noted that the percentage of oil gain differ from case to case. In one of the case M/s.Shailja Polyeste .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hold that an adhoc addition of Rs.2 lacs shall serve the purpose to cover up any leakage as also the gap between the two percentage of oil gain noted by the AO. Resultantly, part relief is granted thus this ground may be treated as partly allowed. 8. Ground No.3 reads as under:- 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of India-tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making disallowance of Rs.3,23,196/- on account of credit balance of NCCD (CENVAT) being written off. 8.1. It was noted by the AO that for the year under consideration an amount of Rs.3,23,196/- was written off by debiting the profit & loss account pertaining to "AED & NCCD". Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to the balance-sheet. The AED and NCCD were applicable on POY, i.e. raw material. When the finished goods, i.e. texturised yarn is manufactured, the excise is levied in the form of basic duty. The assessee has adopted exclusive method of accounting, therefore debited the net purchases and those were separately recorded in the books of accounts. We find force in this argument of the assessee because while maintaining the exclusive method of accounting the assessee had a choice to increase the value of the purchases in respect of the duty paid in the form of AED & NCCD. In other words, an expenditure was incurred but that expenditure could not be adjusted against the CENVAT Rules because on the finished goods, i.e. texturised yarn only the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates