TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... placed on record and held that the equipments which are used are integral part of the plant. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly allowed the appeal by reversing the view of both the lower authorities. If the authorities were not agreeable with the opinion of the expert, then appropriate procedure should have been followed, which is not followed in the present case. In view of this, the view taken by the Tribunal is correct and the question posed for our consideration is answered against the department and in favour of the assessee and it is held that the depreciation allowed by the Tribunal is just and proper and no interference is called for in the present appeal. - Decided against revenue. - TAX APPEAL NO. 1147 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 7-6- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er IT rules to the tune of ₹ 11,72,38,528/-. Perusal of depreciation chart revealed that depreciation on following assets is either claimed excess or is not allowable. (i) Pollution Control Equipments: Addition to the pollution control equipments is shown to the tune of ₹ 4,73,69,089/-. All the additions is shown in the second half of the year where the assets are used for less than 180 days. Depreciation on these assets is claimed 100%. Perusal of the details revealed that the items which are treated by the assessee as pollution control equipment, do not fit in the block of 100% depreciation as per IT rules. In the light of depreciation chart given in the IT rules. It was specifically asked to submit report of technical pers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which 100% depreciation is allowable. In view of above, depreciation on rest of the plant and machineries is allowed @ 25% and excess depreciation is calculated as under:- Depreciation claimed @ 50% on Rs.1,11,52,118/- = Rs.55,76,059/- Less: Depreciation allowable 12.5% of above = Rs.13,94,014/- Excess Depreciation = Rs.41,82,045/- Thus, excess depreciation claimed on pollution control equipment of ₹ 41,82,045/- is disallowable and added to the income. 2.1 He has also taken us through the order of CIT, (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vered under the block of 100% depreciation but the same should be allowed because this machinery is also functions with the equipments where 100% depreciation is allowable. I do not agree with the appellant. Disallowance is upheld. 2.2 Thereafter, he took us through the reasoning adopted and the judgment sought to be relied upon by the Tribunal rendered by Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Shree Synthetic Limited, 162 ITR 819 . He contended that this judgment is pertaining to altogether a different issue and it is not applicable in the present case. He submitted that the Tribunal has travelled beyond the items which are referred in the Appendix-A and, therefore, this appeal is required to be allowed by setting aside the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments, being ..... (a) mechanical screen systems (b) Aerated detritus chambers (including air compressor) (c) Mechanically skimmed oil and grease removal systems (d) Chemical feed systems and flash mixing equipment (e) Mechanical flocculators and mechanical reactors (f) Diffused air/mechanically aerated activated sludge systems (g) Aerated lagoon systems (h) Biofilters (i) Methane-recovery anaerobic digester systems (j) Air flotation systems (k) Air/steam stripping systems (l) Urea hydrolysis systems (m) Marine outfall systems (n) Centrifuge for dewatering sludge (o) Rotating biological contractor or bio-disc (p) Ion exchange resin column ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
