TMI Blog1992 (9) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 (for short "the Act"), on the following question : " In the facts and circumstances of the case whether the Tribunal was right in disallowing the claim of the assessee for initial depreciation in respect of the plant and machinery installed by the assessee, but not put to use during the year ?" The assessee claimed in the assessment year 1976-77 initial depreciation on two machines--cranksha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1st day of May, 1974, by an assessee engaged in the business of operation of ships or aircraft or in the case of new machinery or plant (other than office appliances or road transport vehicles) installed after that date for the purposes of business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or of construction, manufacture or production of any one or more of the article ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the purposes of clause (ii) :" Having regard to the object of depreciation allowance, the expression "owned by the assessee and used for the purposes of the business" and the language used in clause (vi), it seems to us that unless the machinery is actually put to use for the purposes of business of the assessee, the depreciation allowance is not to be granted. This view is fortified by a de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cult to accept this line of approach. The scheme seems to be that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction in respect of the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the machinery or plant was installed and was used in such year for the purposes of business carried on by the assessee. If, however, the machinery is not used in an year in which it has been installed but none the les ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... found in the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. A bare perusal of those provisions will indicate that the object, the words and the context of section 10(2) are not similar to the object, words and context of section 32 of the Income-tax Act. The case of CIT v. Vayithri Plantations Ltd. [1981] 128 ITR 675 (Mad) pertains to development rebate under section 33 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
