2023 (7) TMI 242 - HC - Income Tax

Rate of depreciation on UPS - HELD THAT - There is nothing on record to suggest that the UPS equipment, in this case, was used for purposes other than running a computer. UPS equipment, as the acronym goes, is a piece of equipment which ensures that there is an uninterrupted power supply, to prevent loss of data in the event of a power outage. If anything is crucial to the working of a computer, it is UPS equipment, which ensures that important data that is being handled or dealt with by the user is not lost on account of sudden power failure. We do not intend to suggest that any and every piece of equipment which, generally, acts as a UPS contraption, say for an industrial unit, and in this context also supports a computer system would fall in this category and thus be amenable to depreciation at the rate of 60%, as against the rate provided in the residuary entry which is 15%.Thus,we are not inclined to entertain a question of law concerning this aspect of the matter. Treatment of subsidy received from the Government of Goa - Revenue or capital receipt - HELD THAT - Subsidy received by the respondent/assessee was an incentive given to establish an industrial unit in a backward area and, thus, generate employment for local inhabitants, we cannot but agree with the Tribunal and CIT(A) that the subsidy, indeed, was a capital receipt. Similarly, insofar as the other limb of the issue is concerned, we agree with the Tribunal that the measure for calculating the subsidy, which was 25% of the fixed capital cost, cannot determine the purpose for which the subsidy was given, and, thus, as directed by CIT(A), adjusted proportionately against the cost of the assets. Since the subsidy in this case was not intended as a payment to meet, directly or indirectly, a part of the cost of the assets, no adjustment could have been ordered, as was directed by CIT(A). The Tribunal, on this score, in our view, reached the correct conclusion.

Summary

Issues:
The judgment concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. The appellant/revenue has raised questions regarding the deletion of addition of license fee, reduction of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, higher depreciation rate, deletion of addition of depreciation on energy saving & pollution control devices, and treatment of subsidy received from Govt of Goa.

License Fee Disallowance:
The respondent/assessee declared total income as Rs. 728,92,72,770/-. The assessed income was pegged at Rs. 798,95,13,887/- due to various additions, including disallowance of license fee. CIT(A) allowed the appeal partially by deleting the addition made on account of license fee disallowance.

Depreciation Rate Dispute - UPS:
The first issue concerns the rate of depreciation on UPS claimed by the respondent/assessee. The coordinate bench held that UPS is an integral part of the computer system, allowing depreciation at 60%. The appellant/revenue sought to distinguish the judgment, but without factual basis, leading the court to dismiss the question of law on this aspect.

Treatment of Subsidy Received:
CIT(A) treated the subsidy received from the Government of Goa as a capital receipt and directed its reduction from the block of assets on a proportionate basis. The Tribunal agreed that the subsidy was a capital receipt, not intended to meet any part of the cost of the assets directly or indirectly. The court upheld the Tribunal's decision, concluding that no substantial question of law arose for consideration in this regard.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the appeal by the appellant/revenue, as no substantial questions of law were found in the issues regarding license fee disallowance, depreciation rate on UPS, and treatment of subsidy received. The decisions of the Tribunal and CIT(A) were upheld in these matters.