TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mber For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Jeetendra Chand, Sr. DR ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Delhi dated 15.02.2019 for the AY 2012-13 in holding that Section 154 cannot be invoked for making disallowance on account of additional depreciation. 2. In spite of issue of notice fixing the date of hearing on several dates, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was moved. Therefore, we proceed to dispose off this appeal on hearing the Ld. DR. 3. Briefly stated the facts are that the assessee filed return of income on 31.12.2012 declaring income of Rs.39,23,24,830/-. The assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation made by the Assessing Officer while passing the order u/s 154 of the Act, observing as under: 4.1.1 I have considered the impugned order and the submissions of the appellant. The third proviso to section 32(1)(iia) has been inserted on the statute with effect from 01.04.2016 and is applicable from AY 2016-17 onwards. However, with respect to claim of additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia), various courts have held that if the plant and machinery which is eligible for additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) is put to use for less than 180 days in the said financial year and only 50% of additional depreciation can be claimed in that year, balance 50% can be availed in the subsequent year. The Hon ble Karnataka High Court, in the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of DCIT vs. Cosmo Film Ltd. (139 ITD 268). I have carefully gone through the decisions cited by the Ld. AR. The decision cited is applicable in the case of appellant. 6.3 There is no bar in law that once the amount @ 15% of new plant and machinery is calculated and only 50% is allowable in that particular year on account of period of usage then balance shall not be allowed forever. The law does not restrict/prohibit that the balance of 50% so calculated shall not be allowed in the immediate succeeding year. The additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) as provided by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2022 w.e.f. 01.04.2003 is explained by Circular No. 8 of 2002 27.08.2002 reported in 258 ITR (ST) 13 as being a deduction of a further sum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vided in law which restrict the carry forward of the additional sum of depreciation which is a one time affair available to assessee on the new machinery and plant . 6.6 The rationale of the section 32 (1)(iia) towards the allowance of the additional depreciation has been dealt in detail in all the case laws cited by the appellant. As it appears that in order to settle the said anomaly in the interpretation of the law, suitable amendment was enacted under provisions of additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii) by the Finance Act, 2015, which is in line with the rationale of the allowability of the full eligible quantum of the claim of additional depreciation. 6.7 Therefore, considering the factual matrix of the case, ration of judicia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ous, plain. It means open to view, visible, evident, appears, appearing as real and true, conspicuous, manifest, obvious, seeming. A mistake which can be rectified u/s 154 is one which is patent, which is obvious and whose discovery is not dependent on argument or elaboration. In our view amendment of an order does not mean obliteration of the order originally passed and its substitution by a new order .What the Revenue intends to do in the present case is precisely the substitution of the order which, according to us, is not permissible under the provisions of section 154 and, therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in holding that there was mistake apparent on the face of the record .. In order to bring in application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
