2014 (10) TMI 784 - HC - Income Tax

Deduction of amount of depreciation from profits u/s 115JA Method of calculation of depreciation changed from Straight line method to WDV Interest to be charged u/s 234B and 234C or not - Held that - Following the decision in Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax (Assessment) v. Farmson Pharmaceuticals Guj. Ltd. 2011 (4) TMI 1037 - Gujarat High Court the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) directing not to charge interest u/s 234B and 234 of the Act since the total income was determined u/s 115J of the Act Decided partly in favour of revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to the judgment and order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 06.06.2001.
2. Substantial questions of law raised regarding depreciation method and interest charges under sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act.

Analysis:
1. The Department challenged the Tribunal's judgment, questioning the deduction of depreciation under Section 115JA when the Assessee changed the method from "Straight line method" to "WDV Method." The Counsel argued that the issue of interest charges under sections 234B and 234C is covered by a Supreme Court decision in the case of Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Rolta India Ltd. The Court emphasized that the expression "assessed tax" includes tax determined under section 115JA, making the interest under section 234B applicable to companies falling under MAT provisions.

2. The Court referred to a previous decision in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Farmson Pharmaceuticals Guj. Ltd. to address the issue of depreciation method change. Citing precedents like Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. CIT and CIT v. Kwality Biscuits Ltd., the Court concluded that the Tribunal was correct in not charging interest under sections 234B and 234C when the total income was determined under section 115J of the Act. Consequently, the first issue was decided against the Department, while the second issue was ruled in favor of the Department.

In conclusion, the Tax Appeal partly succeeded based on the Court's analysis and interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act and previous judicial decisions.