9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
1. Interpretation of depreciation rates for trucks used in transport business. 2. Determination of whether the business involves running trucks on hire. 3. Validity of the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax. Summary: The High Court of GAUHATI addressed a case where the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred three questions under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The primary issue was whether trucks owned by an assessee-company were used for running them on hire, impacting the depreciation rate. The company engaged in transport business used its trucks for carrying goods, earning hire charges. Initially allowed at 40%, the depreciation rate was reduced to 30% by the Assessing Officer, stating the trucks were not used for running on hire. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) overturned the reduction, but the Tribunal reinstated it, emphasizing the lack of truck usage for running on hire. The Tribunal's decision was challenged, leading to the reference to the High Court. The Court analyzed the definitions of "hire" and "transportation," concluding that the company indeed ran the vehicles on hire for transporting goods, entitling them to the higher depreciation rate. The Court considered the distinction between using vehicles for business purposes and running them on hire, highlighting that the company's primary business was to make vehicles available for transporting goods for hire. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the higher depreciation rate. The questions were answered in favor of the assessee regarding running trucks on hire and the validity of the Deputy Commissioner's order. The judgment was delivered by D. N. BARUAH J., with the Court directing the transmission of the judgment to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati.
|
