TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowance alone as per the Straight Line Method of depreciation - the failure of the auditor cannot be put against the respondent - Moreover, the issue has already been covered by the Judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore Vs. Kikani Exports (P) Ltd [ 2019 (3) TMI 1003 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] and hence, this is also answered against the Revenue. - T.C.A.No. 409 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 23-1-2020 - Mr. Justice N. Kirubakaran And Mr. Justice P. Velmurugan For the Appellant : Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel For the Respondent : Mr.K.Ravi JUDGMENT N.KIRUBAKARAN, J. This tax case appeal has been filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmill and allowed depreciation at the rates prescribed for windmill. The Assessment Officer found that the assessee had claimed depreciation at the rate of 80% on generator, transponder and civil installations claiming them as integral part of windmill and they have been installed and connected with the windmill to support the working of the windmill. Accordingly, disallowed the claim of depreciation for civil and electrical components of windmill @ 80% and allowed @ 15% and 10% respectively. 4.Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on two grounds. With regard to the Depreciation on Wind Mills, the CIT(A) quoted the report of the Additional DIT (Investiga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these observations, the Hon'ble ITAT held that the CIT(A) was justified in taking a view that the windmills were put to use for a period more than 180 days during the relevant previous year and allowing the full claim of depreciation and dismissed the Department's Appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, this present appeal has been filed. 7.Heard Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant and Mr.K.Ravi, learned Counsel for the respondent. 8.This tax case appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law: (i)Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the windmill was put to use for more than 180 days and therefore, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
