TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2013 - - - Dated:- 2-12-2013 - M. R. Shah And R. P. Dholaria,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. KM Parikh, Advocate JUDGMENT (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice M. R. Shah) 1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ITAT ) dated 10/05/2013 in ITA No. 409/Ahd/2013 for the Assessment Year 2007-08, the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following substantial question of law; Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the tribunal was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs.1,17,98,030/- on account of disallowance of additional depreciation on wind electric generator without apprecia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act dated 05/12/2011, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) and considering the decisions of Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. VTM Ltd. reported in [2009] 319 ITR 336 (Mad) and in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hi Tech Arai Ltd. reported in [2010] 321 ITR 477 (Mad) the CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.1,17,98,030/- on account of disallowance of Wind Electric Generator and held that the assessee will be entitled to deduction as claimed under Section 32 (1) (iia) of the Income Tax Act. 2.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the CIT(A), the revenue preferred appeal before the ITAT and by impugned judgment and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim additional depreciation is that the setting up of new machinery or plant should have been acquired and installed by an assessee, who was already engaged in the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and considering the relevant provisions of Section 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act, which was prevailing at the relevant time, i.e. during the year under consideration, it cannot be said that the ITAT by applying the ratio of decision of the Madras High Court in the case of VTM Ltd (Supra) and in the case of Hi Tech Arai Ltd. (Supra) has committed any error in deleting the addition of Rs.1,17,98,030/- on account of disallowance of additional depreciation of Wind El ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
