TMI Blog1993 (3) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion was not allowable on refrigeration plant. According to him, the plant and machinery used for the purpose of manufacturing ice constituted refrigeration plant within the meaning of the above entry of the depreciation schedule and since the words appear in the aforesaid entry of the depreciation schedule which means that the refrigeration plant is not entitled to extra shift allowance, the grant of such allowance in the assessments was a mistake apparent from the record. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Gurinder Singh Karien (1981) 23 CTR (P H) 8 : (1982) 133 ITR 300 (P H). 3. On appeal, the CIT(A) passed a consolidated order by which he upheld the action of the ITO. According to the CIT(A), the decision of the Punjab Haryana High Court relied on by the ITO was directly against the assessee's case. 4. In the further appeal before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had two separate businesses, one in cold storage and the other in ice manufacturing. He drew our attention to pages 92 to 94 of the paper book containing the P L accounts and the balance sheet alongwith the annexur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t being a ship) for which no special rate has been prescribed under item (ii) herein below (ii) Special rates: A. (***) B. (***) (13) Refrigeration plant containers, etc. (other than racks) [N.E.S.A.]" From the above entry, it is clear that extra shift depreciation allowance is not available to refrigeration plant containers, etc. (other than racks). The entry does not refer to refrigeration plant as it is. Nor does it refer to any plant and machinery engaged in the manufacture of ice. The action of the Departmental authorities can perhaps be possible to hold that ice making machinery falls within those words. but we have to interpret the entry in the depreciation schedule as it is, and if we so look at the entry what we find is that extra shift allowance is not available to refrigeration plant containers only. The question whether the plant and machinery used by the assessee in the present cases can be stated to fall within the entry is a highly debatable question on which two conceivable views are certainly possible. It is no doubt true that the Punjab Haryana High Court has held that machinery for ice making is refrigeration plant and is entitled to depreciation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h extra shift depreciation allowance is not to be allowed under the entry, we have to uphold that the allowance of extra shift depreciation on ice making plant and machinery owned by the assessee was rightly granted in the assessments. Therefore, even on merits, the assessee has to succeed. 8. In the result, the appeals for the asst. yrs. 1981-82 to 1983- 84 are allowed. 9. In the appeal for the asst. yr. 1984-85, the only issue is whether the Departmental authorities justified in disallowing extra shift depreciation allowance on cold storage plant. The amount involved is Rs. 1,26,644. The case of the ITO is that cold storage chamber being in the category of refrigeration plant, no extra shift allowance is admissible thereon as the same has been specifically excluded by the letters NESA in the depreciation schedule. Previously, the ITO refers to the very same entry in the depreciation schedule which was relied on by him for withdrawing the extra shift depreciation allowance on ice making plant and machinery for the asst. yrs. 1981-82 to 1982-83. The CIT(A) held that cold storage chamber was not a plant, and, therefore, it would not qualify for extra shift allowance to which, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the disallowance of extra shift depreciation allowance on cold storage chamber. For the reasons stated by us in the appeal for the asst. yr. 1984-85, this claim is upheld and the Departmental authorities are directed to grant extra shift depreciation allowance on cold storage chamber for all these three years. 13. In respect of the asst. yr. 1985-86, there is one more ground. This is against the disallowance of Rs. 5,000 under the head "general charges". In view of the fact that against the order of the CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of Rs. 5,000 out of the `general charges' of Rs. 50,383 for the asst. yr. 1984-85 no appeal was filed by the Department, we delete the disallowance for the asst. yr. 1985-86 also. This ground is allowed. 14. In the appeal for the asst. yr. 1987-88, there is one more ground which is that the Departmental authorities were not justified in making an addition to the trading account. The facts in this connection are that there was an increase in the manufacture of ice blocks in the year of account to 3,80,341 from 3,43,497 ice blocks manufactured in the immediately earlier assessment year. The wastage claimed for the assessment year under appeal w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
