2013 (8) TMI 1135 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves appeals filed by both the Revenue and the Assessee against the common order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) at Tiruchirapalli for various assessment years.

Issue 1: Depreciation claim by Revenue
The Revenue raised the issue that allowing depreciation on a capital asset already claimed as an application of income would result in double deduction. The Revenue relied on judgments from the Kerala High Court and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench. However, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench-A, in the assessee's own case for other assessment years, held that there is no double deduction. The Tribunal followed judgments from the Punjab and Haryana High Court and upheld the Commissioner's order in favor of the assessee. Consequently, the appeals filed by the Revenue were dismissed.

Issue 2: Rejection of grounds by Assessee
The Assessee contended that the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in rejecting their grounds against the reopening of assessments under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Although the Commissioner rejected the contention regarding reopening, the appeals of the Assessee were allowed on the merits of the issue. The Tribunal considered the ground against reopening as academic and found that the appeals of the Assessee were also liable to be dismissed. Ultimately, both the Revenue's and the Assessee's appeals were dismissed.

This judgment highlights the interpretation of depreciation claims and the reopening of assessments under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, emphasizing the importance of legal precedents and consistency in tax assessments.