2013 (8) TMI 13 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance of depreciation - Vehicles registered in the names of the purchasers and financed by the assessee under a hire purchase agreement - CIT disallowed depreciation - Tribunal allowed depreciation - Held that - Section 32 requires that the assessee must use the asset for the purposes of business . It does not mandate usage of the asset by the assessee itself. As long as the asset is utilised for the purpose of business of the assessee, the requirement of Section 32 will stand satisfied, notwithstanding non-usage of the asset itself by the assessee - As the owner, it used the assets in the course of its business, satisfying both requirements of Section 32 of the Act and hence, is entitled to claim depreciation in respect of additions made to the trucks, which were leased out - Following decisions of CIT v. Bansal Credits Ltd. 2002 (11) TMI 76 - DELHI High Court , CIT v. M.G.F. (India) Ltd. 2004 (1) TMI 10 - DELHI High Court and CIT v. Annamalai Finance Ltd. 2004 (10) TMI 51 - MADRAS High Court - Decided against Revenue.

Issues:
1. Admission of appeal without hearing the respondent.
2. Allowability of depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act to the lessor.
3. Interpretation of the term "owner" in the context of leasing agreements.
4. Comparison of the present case with the judgment in Industrial Credit And Development Syndicate Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax.

Issue 1: Admission of appeal without hearing the respondent
The respondent raised an objection that the appeal was admitted ex-parte without hearing him. The respondent argued that the questions framed at the time of admission did not align with the actual issue in the case, which was related to the lessor and lessee dynamics. The appellant acknowledged that the question of hire-purchase was not involved but emphasized the issue of depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Act to the lessor.

Issue 2: Allowability of depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act to the lessor
The core issue revolved around whether the respondent/assessee, engaged in leasing vehicles, was entitled to claim depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation, a decision upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, concluding that the assessee was indeed entitled to depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Act. The High Court, after considering the arguments and the Tribunal's judgment, reframed the substantial question of law to focus on the entitlement of the assessee to depreciation.

Issue 3: Interpretation of the term "owner" in the context of leasing agreements
The judgment referred to the case of Industrial Credit And Development Syndicate Limited, where the Apex Court considered the ownership aspect in leasing agreements. The Court analyzed the ownership presumption in favor of the assessee based on the delivery of vehicles, lease agreements, and control over the assets. The Motor Vehicles Act's definition of ownership was also scrutinized, with a specific focus on the lessee's possession and registration. The Court ultimately held that the lessor, in this case, was the owner of the vehicles, satisfying the requirements of Section 32 of the Act for claiming depreciation.

Issue 4: Comparison with the judgment in Industrial Credit And Development Syndicate Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
The judgment extensively compared the present case with the Industrial Credit And Development Syndicate Limited case, where the Apex Court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing depreciation to the lessor. The Court highlighted the key findings of the Apex Court, emphasizing that the lessor is considered the owner of the vehicle in a lease agreement. The judgment concluded that the present case aligned with the decision in Industrial Credit And Development Syndicate Limited, and therefore, the lessor was entitled to claim depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Act.

In summary, the High Court's judgment addressed the admission process, the entitlement of the lessor to claim depreciation under Section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, the interpretation of ownership in leasing agreements, and the alignment of the present case with the Industrial Credit And Development Syndicate Limited case. The Court ultimately dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee based on the principles established in the referenced Apex Court judgment.

← Previous Next →