2013 (11) TMI 1049 - HC - Income Tax

Electrical installations electrical fittings or plant and machinery Rate of depreciation 10% or 15% - Held that - The items include transformers, window ACs, split ACs, invertors, etc - The majority of the expenses are in respect of transformer, panel switch gear, LT PVC Cable, Poly Cab Cable, electric generating set, Electrical Control Panel, Electric Items, installation work, DG Set, etc. All these show that all such expenditure cannot be part of the plant and machinery - The details of expenditure show that majority of expenses were towards the electric fittings - The case laws relied upon by the ld. AR are also having different facts - There is a variation in the nature of the business and facts of case - The matter requires greater consideration as different rates have been specified for electrical fittings including electrical wiring, socket etc. and plant and machinery - Each item has to be examined separately and it has to be determined whether the entry electrical fittings is applicable or the items/goods fall in the entry plant and machinery The issue was remanded back to the tribunal to examine the question once again with reference to each and every particular item.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Determination of the appropriate depreciation rate for items listed under "electrical installations."
2. Classification of various items as either "electrical fittings" or "plant and machinery."

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Determination of the appropriate depreciation rate for items listed under "electrical installations."
The primary legal question addressed in this judgment is whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was correct in holding that items listed under "electrical installations" are entitled to depreciation at 10% under "electrical fittings" rather than at 15% under "plant and machinery." The appellant-assessee, engaged in the manufacture of steel metal components, claimed depreciation at 15% for various items listed under "electrical installations." However, the Assessing Officer allowed depreciation at 10% for these items, leading to a recomputation of the depreciation.

Issue 2: Classification of various items as either "electrical fittings" or "plant and machinery."
The appellant-assessee provided detailed lists of items for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, including transformers, panel switchgear, LT PVC cables, poly cab cables, electric generating sets, and electric control panels, among others. The ITAT upheld the Assessing Officer's decision, reasoning that the majority of the expenses were towards electrical fittings, which are subject to a 10% depreciation rate. The tribunal emphasized that these items could not be classified under "plant and machinery," which would attract a 15% depreciation rate.

The tribunal's reasoning was based on the nature of the appellant's business, which involves manufacturing and selling sheet metal components for automobiles and the white goods sector. The tribunal distinguished the appellant's case from other cases cited, such as CIT Vs. MTNL and Siemens Ltd., where the nature of the businesses was different, involving communication networks and the manufacture of equipment for electricity generation and transmission, respectively.

Remand Order:
The High Court acknowledged that while electrical fittings, including wirings, switches, sockets, etc., are entitled to a 10% depreciation rate, plant and machinery are entitled to a 15% rate. Given the diverse nature of the items listed by the appellant, the court felt that the matter required greater consideration. Each item needed to be examined separately to determine whether it falls under "electrical fittings" or "plant and machinery."

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the High Court remanded the matter to the tribunal for a detailed examination of each item. The parties were permitted to rely on relevant case law and to argue that some items might fall under different categories, such as "electrical equipment." The tribunal was directed to consider and decide these contentions in accordance with the law.

Conclusion:
The High Court answered the question of law and disposed of the appeals, remanding the case to the tribunal for further examination and classification of each item to determine the appropriate depreciation rate.