9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Claim for depreciation on a lorry purchased during the accounting year. Analysis: The appeal pertains to the assessment year 1974-75, with the sole contention being the denial of depreciation by the Assessing Officer (ITO) on a lorry purchased by the assessee during the year. The ITO disallowed the depreciation claim as the registration of the lorry was not transferred to the assessee's name within the accounting year. This decision was upheld by the Appellate Authority Commissioner (AAC). The assessee argued that although the registration transfer occurred in the subsequent year, possession of the lorry was taken on 30th March 1974, and it was used for business purposes between Bangalore and Hyderabad. The Departmental Representative contended that without the registration transfer, the assessee could not be considered the owner of the vehicle. Upon review, the ITAT found that the assessee did take possession of the lorry during the accounting year and used it for business purposes, as evidenced by trip sheets. The tribunal noted that while the registration transfer may have occurred later, the assessee had effectively utilized the vehicle for business during the accounting year. The ITAT emphasized that ownership and usage, not just registration, are crucial for depreciation claims. As such, the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, directing the ITO to allow depreciation on the lorry for the relevant accounting period. In conclusion, the ITAT allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the assessee's entitlement to depreciation on the lorry was valid, given the actual possession and business use of the vehicle during the accounting year. The judgment underscores the significance of ownership and utilization in determining depreciation eligibility, beyond the mere technicality of registration transfer.
|
