Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Lakshmi Technology and Engineering Industries Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1, Coimbatore.

2016 (6) TMI 44 - ITAT CHENNAI

Disallowance of additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) - whether the assessee is entitled to carry forward 50% of additional depreciation in the succeeding year when the plant and machinery was put in use less than 180 days in the preceding previous year? - Held that:- We have carefully gone through the order of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Automotive Coaches & Components Ltd. v. DCIT (2016 (4) TMI 34 - ITAT CHENNAI ) and find that the issue involved is squarely covered in favou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Assessing Officer to allow 50% of additional depreciation in the succeeding year as claimed by the assessee - Decided in favour of assessee - I.T.A.No.492/Mds/2015 - Dated:- 26-4-2016 - Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member and Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member For The Appellant : Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate For The Respondent : Mrs. S. Vijaya Prabha, JCIT ORDER PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Com .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on in issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act and not pressed the ground before the Tribunal. Since the ld. Counsel for the assessee has endorsed in the grounds of appeal that Ground 1 to 3 not pressed , hence, the ground relating to assumption of jurisdiction stands dismissed as not pressed. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income admitting total income of ₹.1,21,71,870/-. The Assessing Officer believed that the income assessable to tax had .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

duly served on the assessee. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer disallowed the additional depreciation claimed by the assessee. 4. On appeal, after considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and the ld. Counsel for the assessee has strongly relied on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Automoti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ord and gone through the orders of authorities below. We have also perused the case law relied on by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. The point at issue before us is whether the assessee is entitled to carry forward 50% of additional depreciation in the succeeding year when the plant and machinery was put in use less than 180 days in the preceding previous year. By following the decision of Cochin Benches of ITAT in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. ACIT (supra) and the decision of the Hon ble K .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ant and machinery purchased during the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer found that the additions to fixed assets were made in the second half of the financial year, therefore, 50% of additional depreciation has been claimed. The balance 50% was carried forward in the next year. The Assessing Officer found that the additional depreciation is allowable only during the year in which the machinery was installed and used for business of the assessee. There is no provision in the Income .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. Section 32(1)(iia) reads as follows: "32(1)(iia) in the case of any new machinery or plant (other than ships and aircraft), which has been acquired and installed after the 31st day of March, 2005, by an assessee engaged in the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing, a further sum equal to twenty per cent of the actual cost of such machinery or plant shall be allowed as deduction under clause .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ction (whether by way of depreciation or otherwise) in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" of any one previous year." 10. We have also carefully gone through the Second Proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Act, which reads as follows: "Provided further that where an asset referred to clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iia), as the case may be, is acquired by the assessee during the previous year and is put to use for t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n assessee, who is engaged in the business of manufacture or produce of article or thing, then, a sum equal to 20% of the actual cost of the machinery and plant shall be allowed as a deduction. It is not in dispute that the assessee has acquired and installed the machinery after 31-03- 2005. It is also not in dispute that the assessee is engaged in the manufacture of article or thing. Therefore, the assessee is eligible for additional depreciation which is equivalent to 20% of the actual cost of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nery provided the machinery or plant is acquired and installed after 31- 03-2005. Proviso to section 32(1)(iia) says that if the machinery was acquired by the assessing during the previous year and has put to use for the purpose of business less than 180 days, the deduction shall be restricted to 50% of the amount calculated at the prescribed rate. Therefore, if the machinery is put to use in any particular year, the assessee is entitled for 50% of the prescribed rate of additional depreciation. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by invoking Second Proviso to section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 12. This issue was considered by the Delhi Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Cosmo Films Ltd (supra). The revenue has taken a similar ground as taken before this Tribunal that the assessee cannot carry forward the additional depreciation to be allowed in the subsequent assessment year. The Delhi Bench of this Tribunal after considering the provisions of section 32(1)(iia) and proviso to section 321)(ii) of the Act found that when th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cquired and put to use for a period less than 180 days in the year of acquisition. This restriction is only on the basis of period of use. There I no restriction that balance of one time incentive in the form of additional sum of depreciation shall not be available in the subsequent year. Section 32(2) provides for a carry forward set up of unabsorbed depreciation. This additional benefit in the form of additional allowance u/s 32(1)(iia) is one time benefit to encourage the industrialization an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o restriction in the statute to deny the benefit of balance of 50% when the new machinery and plant were acquired and used for less than 180 days. One time benefit extended to assessee has been earned in the year of acquisition of new machinery and plant. It has been calculated @15% but restricted to 50% only on account of usage of these plant & machinery in the year of acquisition. In section 32(1)(iia), the expression used I "shall be allowed". Thus, the assessee had earned the b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ust be made available in the subsequent year. The overall deduction of depreciation u/s 32 shall definitely not exceed the total cost of machinery and plant . In view of this matter, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and direct to extend the benefit. We allow ground no.2 of the assessee's appeal. Since we have decided ground no.2 in favour of assessee, there is no need to decide the alternate claim raised in ground no.3. The same is dismissed." 13. This issue was also con .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cent of the deduction is to be allowed in the current year, i.e. asst. yr. 2006-07. The learned CIT(A) has merely directed the verification of the contentions of the assessee and to allow the balance additional depreciation after such factual verification. Accordingly, finding no merit therein, ground No.3 raised by the Department is rejected." 14. A similar view was taken by Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in MITC Rolling Mills (P.) Ltd. (supra). In view of the above decisions of the co-ord .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rnataka High Court, after extracting the provisions of Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, found that beneficial legislation has to be interpreted liberally so as to benefit the assessee. Karnataka High Court has also found that the intention of the legislation is to allow additional benefit. The Karnataka High Court opined that the proviso would not restrain the assessee from claiming the balance of the benefit of additional depreciation in the subsequent assessment year. Accordingly, confirmed the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

vant assessment year. 8. The aforesaid two conditions, i.e., the undertaking acquiring new plant and machinery should be a new industrial undertaking, OF that it should be claimed in one year, have been done away by substituting clause (iia) with effect from 01.0.2006. The grant of additional depreciation, under the aforesaid provision, is for the benefit of the assessee and with the purpose of encouraging industrialization, by either setting up a new industrial unit or by expanding the existing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

provides that "a further sum equal to 20% of the actual cost of such machinery or plant shall be allowed as deduction under Clause (ii)". The word "shall" used in the said Clause is very significant. The benefit which is to be granted is 20% additional depreciation. By virtue of the proviso referred to above, only 10% can be claimed in one year, if plant and machinery is put to use for less than 180 days said financial year. ………very purpose of insertion .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in one assessment year, if certain condition was not fulfilled. But, that, in our considered view, would not restrain the assessee from claiming the balance of the benefit in the subsequent assessment year. The Tribunal, in our view, has rightly held, that additional depreciation allowed under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act is a onetime benefit to encourage industrialization, and provisions related to it have to be construed reasonably, liberally and purposively, to make the provision meaningful .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version