TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 278X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing Officer that the assets were not put to use at all. Once the factory building is put to use, it is not possible to restrict the depreciation on the said building by stating that only a portion thereof has been put to use. Similarly, in relation to block of assets, it is not possible to segregate items falling within the block for the purposes of granting depreciation or restricting the claim thereof. Once it is found that the assets are used for business, it is not necessary that all the items falling within plant and machinery have to be simultaneously used for being entitled to depreciation. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the Tribunal committed serious error in law in disallowing the depreciation. - Decided in fav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n as the lead matter. 2. Briefly stated, the assessee-company is engaged in the business of manufacture of detergents. During the year under consideration, manufacturing activity was not carried out by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee claimed depreciation on the block of plant and machinery from the earlier year. However, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order on January 5, 1998, disallowing the depreciation. Against the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) partly allowed the appeal, vide order dated October 4, 1999. Being dissatisfied with it, the Revenue filed appeals before the Tribunal. However, all the appeals filed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of CIT v. Sonal Gum Industries [2010] 322 ITR 542 (Guj), wherein, it has been held that once that factory building is put to use, it is not possible to restrict the depreciation on the said building by stating that only a portion thereof had been put to use. Similarly, in relation to the block of assets, it is not possible to segregate items falling within the block for the purposes of granting depreciation or restricting the claim thereof and once it is found that the assets are used for business, it is not necessary that all the items falling within the plant and machinery have to be simultaneously used for being entitled to depreciation. Reliance was also placed on an unreported decision of this court passed in Tax Appeal No. 429 of 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er that the assets were not put to use at all. Once the factory building is put to use, it is not possible to restrict the depreciation on the said building by stating that only a portion thereof has been put to use. Similarly, in relation to block of assets, it is not possible to segregate items falling within the block for the purposes of granting depreciation or restricting the claim thereof. Once it is found that the assets are used for business, it is not necessary that all the items falling within plant and machinery have to be simultaneously used for being entitled to depreciation. 9. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the Tribunal committed serious error in law in disallowing the depreciation. Thus, the question raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
