2017 (3) TMI 1733 - AT - Income Tax

Payment of lease rental - revenue expenditure - assessee has taken containers on lease - in the books of account, the containers were taken as assets - Held that - The assessee claims that the containers were taken as lease. A copy of the agreement available at paper-book shows that it is a lease-cum-purchase of containers. It is not clear from the agreement whether it is a finance lease or operating lease. The fact remains that the assessee treated the containers as capital asset and alternatively claimed depreciation also. The alternative claim of depreciation was allowed by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Reopening of assessment
2. Treatment of lease rentals

Reopening of Assessment:
The appeals were against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for various assessment years. The first issue in all the appeals was the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The counsel for the assessee conceded that they were not pressing this ground, leading to the dismissal of the issue related to the reopening of assessment.

Treatment of Lease Rentals:
The remaining issue to be adjudicated was regarding lease rentals. The assessee had taken containers on lease, treating them as assets in the books and claiming depreciation on them. The counsel argued that the lease rentals should be allowed as revenue expenditure since the containers were treated as capital assets. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative contended that since the containers were treated as capital assets, the claim for lease rentals was disallowed by the CIT(Appeals), although depreciation was allowed. The Tribunal observed that the agreement showed a lease-cum-purchase of containers, but it was unclear whether it was a finance or operating lease. As the assessee treated the containers as capital assets and claimed depreciation, which was allowed by the Assessing Officer, the Tribunal upheld the lower authority's decision, confirming the disallowance of the lease rental claim. Consequently, all the appeals of the assessee were dismissed.

This judgment addressed the issues of reopening of assessment and the treatment of lease rentals, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the lower authority's decision on the latter issue. The decision was based on the treatment of containers as capital assets by the assessee and the allowance of depreciation, leading to the disallowance of the claim for lease rentals as revenue expenditure.