Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2008 (10) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2008 (10) TMI 369 - HC - Income Tax


Issues:
1. Interpretation of the third proviso to section 32(1) regarding depreciation restriction for companies for the assessment year 1991-92.
2. Whether the restriction on depreciation to 75% applies only if assets are used for non-business purposes.
3. Impact of the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 on depreciation rates.
4. Validity of additional tax levied due to depreciation restriction.

Issue 1: Interpretation of the third proviso to section 32(1)
The case involved a limited company claiming depreciation for the assessment year 1991-92, which was restricted to 75%. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the company, stating that unless assets were proven to be used for non-business purposes, the restriction on depreciation for business use was impermissible. The Tribunal set aside the restriction and canceled the additional tax levied.

Issue 2: Condition for Depreciation Restriction
The appellant argued that the third proviso to clause (ii) of section 32(1) did not specify that the depreciation restriction to 75% applied only if assets were used for non-business purposes. The amendment was introduced to restrict depreciation to mobilize additional resources due to the Gulf crisis, applicable only for the assessment year 1991-92 and solely to companies. The appellant contended that the restriction should apply regardless of asset use, and the Tribunal had misunderstood the provision.

Issue 3: Impact of Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991
The judgment highlighted that the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991 introduced the third proviso to clause (ii) of section 32(1) to restrict depreciation to 75% for the assessment year 1991-92. The amendment aimed to address the financial challenges arising from the Gulf crisis and required extra advance tax to be paid by a specified date.

Issue 4: Validity of Additional Tax
The respondent argued that the appellant had filed a revised return limiting depreciation to 75%, which was also presented before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The appellant contended that the appeal focused on the depreciation quantum and not on additional tax, especially after filing a revised return. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue, allowing the tax appeal and emphasizing that the restriction applied specifically to companies for the assessment year 1991-92.

In conclusion, the judgment clarified the interpretation of the third proviso to section 32(1) regarding depreciation restriction for companies for the assessment year 1991-92. It emphasized the specific application of the restriction, the impact of the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1991, and the validity of the additional tax levied in light of the depreciation restriction.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates