2008 (7) TMI 325 - HC - Income Tax

Depreciation - AO while reworking the profit of the company for the purposes of section 115J, added depreciation held that, for the purposes of s. 115J, only those adjustments, which are specified in the Explanation to the section 115J, can be made from the book profits and depreciation not being one of them and further that the accounts of the company having been prepared in accordance with the Schedule VI to the Companies Act, the AO was in error in disallowing the depreciation as claimed by the Company -AO does not have the jurisdiction to go beyond the net profit shown in the P/L account except to the limited extent provided in the Expl. to section 115J

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in upholding the deletion of depreciation addition due to a change in depreciation method?
2. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance of depreciation as prior period adjustments?

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The Assessing Officer made additions to the company's assessment by disallowing depreciation claimed due to a change in the depreciation method from straight line to written down value. However, the CIT (Appeals) accepted the company's stand that only specified adjustments under Section 115J of the Income Tax Act can be made from book profits. The CIT (Appeals) further noted that the Assessing Officer erred in disallowing the depreciation claimed by the company, as the accounts were prepared in accordance with the Companies Act. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were consequently deleted by the CIT (Appeals).

Issue 2:
The Revenue challenged the CIT (Appeals) order before the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's stand, citing precedents and rulings that supported the company's position. It was highlighted that the Assessing Officer's power under Section 115J is limited to examining if the accounts are maintained in accordance with the Companies Act and making specified adjustments. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (Appeals) order based on various decisions favoring the company's method of depreciation calculation.

The High Court, after considering the arguments and legal precedents, found that the Assessing Officer's jurisdiction is limited to examining the certified accounts under the Companies Act and making specific adjustments as per the Explanation to Section 115J. The Court noted that the Assessing Officer cannot go beyond the net profit shown in the profit and loss account except as provided in the Explanation. The Court also emphasized that the CIT (Appeals) had correctly observed that the Assessing Officer was not permitted to make adjustments not explicitly covered by the explanation. Therefore, the Court upheld the decisions of the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal, finding no error in their stand regarding depreciation for the relevant assessment year.

In conclusion, the High Court answered both issues in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, disposing of the reference accordingly.