2013 (4) TMI 144 - HC - Income Tax

Remitting the matter back to the file of the A.O - Depreciation U/s 32 on Intangible Assets - Interest U/s 234C - Bad debt - Held that - The Tribunal, as noted above, has considered it appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer on the ground that neither the Assessing Officer nor the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has considered as to whether there was a default on the part of the assessee in the payment of advance tax. Since the Tribunal has merely restored the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal as giving rise to any substantial question of law since we are of the view that the order of the Tribunal, if appropriately construed, leaves open all questions to be decided by the Assessing Officer, including on the applicability of the decision of this court in the case of Prime Securities Ltd. 2010 (12) TMI 475 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - Decided against the revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Depreciation on intangible asset acquisition date.
2. Treatment of bad debt issue.
3. Remittance of matter back to Assessing Officer for examination.

Depreciation on Intangible Asset Acquisition Date:
The appeal by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, concerns the allowance of depreciation on the first stock exchange membership card purchased by the assessee in the financial year 1995-96. The key issue is whether depreciation on such an intangible asset is available if acquired before April 1, 1998. The court refers to a judgment in a companion case for the assessment year 2002-03, stating that the first question does not raise any substantial question of law. Therefore, the court dismisses this issue based on the previous judgment.

Treatment of Bad Debt Issue:
Regarding the treatment of bad debt, both the Revenue and the assessee agree that the issue is covered in favor of the assessee by a previous judgment of the court. The court cites a specific case and decides that this question also does not raise any substantial question of law, leading to its dismissal without further analysis.

Remittance of Matter Back to Assessing Officer:
The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for examination based on a specific judgment of the High Court concerning the levy of interest under section 234C. The Revenue argues that the High Court judgment is distinguishable and that the Assessing Officer does not have the power to waive or remit interest. The court, however, upholds the Tribunal's decision, stating that all questions, including the applicability of the High Court judgment, should be decided by the Assessing Officer. As a result, the court dismisses the appeal, concluding that no substantial question of law arises at this stage, as the Assessing Officer will determine the issue in accordance with the law.

In summary, the High Court dismisses the appeal by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2004-05. The court rules on issues related to depreciation on an intangible asset acquisition date, treatment of bad debt, and the remittance of the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The court refers to previous judgments and concludes that no substantial questions of law arise, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.