1985 (3) TMI 47 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
- Whether the Tribunal was legally correct in directing the ITO to consider admissibility of depreciation and development rebate as per Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.
- Whether the Tribunal was legally correct in including the value of machinery in the computation of capital employed for section 84 purposes as per Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

Admissibility of Depreciation and Development Rebate:
The case involved an assessee who purchased machinery under a hire-purchase agreement for a plaster of paris unit. The dispute arose regarding the allowance of depreciation and development rebate on the machinery. The ITO reopened assessments and withdrew the depreciation and rebate but allowed interest on the hire-purchase agreement. The AAC rejected the assessee's contention based on Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The Tribunal held that the ITO was bound by the Circulars and directed the consideration of the assessee's claim in line with the Circulars. The High Court agreed with the Tribunal, citing Supreme Court judgments that Circulars are binding on income-tax authorities. The Circulars resolved the difficulty in assessing income where machinery was purchased on hire-purchase, leading to a decision in favor of the assessee on this issue.

Computation of Capital Employed under Section 84:
Regarding the computation of capital employed under section 84 of the Income Tax Act, the Tribunal determined that if the machinery purchased on hire-purchase belonged to the assessee for depreciation and development rebate purposes, it should also be considered as belonging to the assessee for section 84 application. The High Court found no fault in this reasoning and answered the question in favor of the assessee. The judgment relied on the Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes to resolve the issue at hand without delving into other interpretations of the Act.

Separate Judgment:
The High Court did not mention any separate judgment delivered by the judges, and the decision was based on the interpretation of Circulars and relevant legal provisions.