2016 (7) TMI 1528 - AT - Income Tax

Re-assessment order passed u/s. 147 - depreciation at 40% on wheel loaders and wheel graders - CIT-A accepted reopening on the same set of facts after completion of assessment u/s. 143(3) amounts to change of opinion and hence bad in law - CIT(A) directing depreciation at 40% on wheel loaders and wheel graders as against depreciation at 25% allowed by the AO - HELD THAT - As seen from the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) originally, AO has considered the claim of depreciation and made certain disallowances out of various depreciation claims made in the schedule. It indicates that AO found the claim of 40% depreciation on the above said vehicles appropriate and allowed the same. Since there is specific discussion on the depreciation claims in the first assessment order, allowance of 40% depreciation by the AO certainly indicates that he has consciously allowed the depreciation at that rate after due examination. Therefore, any opinion by the subsequent AO to restrict the same to 25% is a change of opinion, which is not permitted under the provisions of law. Moreover the wheel loaders and Graders are Motor vehicles and is certainly eligible for depreciation at 40% as per schedule and the case law on the subject. No reason to interfere with the well reasoned order of the CIT(A), both on the issue of reopening and as well as allowance of depreciation at 40% on wheel loaders. For these reasons, uphold the order of CIT(A) and reject the grounds of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Depreciation rate on wheel loaders and wheel graders.

Issue 1: Validity of re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act:
The appeal by Revenue was against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Hyderabad, challenging the cancellation of the re-assessment order passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act by the CIT(A). The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in directing depreciation at 40% on wheel loaders and wheel graders instead of the 25% allowed by the AO. The AO had initially allowed the depreciation at 40% on these items, but in a subsequent assessment, a different AO argued that they should only be depreciated at 25%, leading to the re-assessment. The CIT(A) accepted the assessee's argument that the re-opening of assessment, based on the same facts after the original assessment, amounted to a change of opinion and was hence invalid. The CIT(A) relied on various judgments to support this conclusion. Ultimately, the CIT(A) held that the re-assessment proceedings were not validly initiated and annulled them.

Issue 2: Depreciation rate on wheel loaders and wheel graders:
The assessee argued that wheel loaders and wheel graders should be considered as motor vehicles for the purpose of depreciation, citing relevant legal precedents. The CIT(A) agreed with the assessee's interpretation and allowed depreciation at 40% on these items. The CIT(A) noted that the vehicles had been registered as 'other vehicle-MMV' by the Registration Authorities and relied on Supreme Court decisions and Tribunal rulings to support the claim that vehicles designed for special services should be treated as motor vehicles. The CIT(A) specifically referenced judgments from the Hon'ble Karnataka Tribunal and other cases to justify the depreciation rate of 40%. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the AO had initially allowed the 40% depreciation after due examination and that any subsequent attempt to restrict it to 25% constituted a change of opinion, not permitted by law. Consequently, the ITAT rejected the Revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s order regarding the depreciation rate on wheel loaders and wheel graders.

In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision on both the validity of re-assessment proceedings and the depreciation rate on wheel loaders and wheel graders. The judgment highlighted the importance of consistency in assessment decisions and adherence to legal provisions in determining depreciation rates for assets.