TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsideration or not and decide the issue in accordance with law. Hence, the first ground of appeal allowed for statistical purpose. Disallowance of depreciation on Printers, UPS, scanners and Router - @15% OR 60% - According to the AO, the depreciation is only allowable at 15% - HELD THAT:- As the computer accessories and peripherals cannot be used without computer as they are part of the computer system they are entitled to depreciation at a higher rate of 60%. We, therefore respectfully following the decisions M/s. Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Ltd. [ 2019 (2) TMI 1075 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] and BSES Yamuna Powers Ltd. held that the assessee is entitled for depreciation @ 60% - Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irected to show cause why disallowance should not be made u/s. 14A of the Act r/w rule 8D of the Rules. 3. In response, the assessee-company furnished the details, which reads as under: During the year, the assessed company has earned Rs.2529.86 Lakhs as Dividend Income. The details of the same is enclosed as Annexure- VII. This includes Rs. 1625.95 Lakhs of dividend received from Overseas Subsidiaries, which are taxed under Section 115 BBD, at the special rate (If 15% plus applicable surcharge and cesses. Accordingly, the balance amount of Rs.903. 91 Lakhs was claimed as exempted income under Section 10(34). The details of the Dividend Income received during the year alongwith the corresponding investments made is given as An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hand, the learned Departmental Representative has not raised any objection. 7. We have heard both the sides through video conferencing, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. 8. The only objection raised by the ld. counsel for the assessee is that rule 8D(2) of the Rules to section 14A of the Act has no application for the assessment year under consideration i.e., 2015-16, but the AO has wrongly applied. We find that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) needs to consider afresh. Thus, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), and we remit the matter back to the AO for examination whether rule 8D(2) of the Rules applies to the present assessment year under consideration or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The issues relate to the assessment years from 2006-07 to 2009- 10. In all these appeals, the following common substantial questions of law are raised for consideration : i. Whether the Tribunal was justified and correct in holding that UPS is the part of computer and entitled for depreciation at 60% ? and ii. Whether the Tribunal was justified and correct in holding that the provisions of 115JB of the Act, which enables the companies to compute book profit may not be applicable to insurance companies ? 3. We have heard Mr.M.Swaminathan, learned Senior Standing Counsel, assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa, learned Junior Standing Counsel for the appellant and Mr.Sandeep Bagmar, learned counsel accepting notice for the respondent. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
