9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Ltd. [2012 (3) TMI 31 - ITAT, CHENNAI] - Once it is not a new machinery or plant, allowance under Section 32(1)(iia) cannot be allowed - There is nothing in the statute which allows such claim of additional depreciation every year on machinery acquired in earlier year - CIT(Appeals) was justified in confirming the disallowance of additional depreciation – Decided against Assessee. - I.T.A. No. 1824,1825/Mds/2010 - - - Dated:- 4-4-2013 - V.Durga Rao and Abraham P. George , JJ. For the Appellant : G. Stanly. For the Respondent : Smt. Vidisha Kalra. ORDER:- PER : Abraham These are appeals filed by the respective assessees, directed against orders of CIT(Appeals) confirming the denial of claim of additional depreciat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red during the periods 2002-03 to 2004-05 and 2005-06, was allowable in subsequent assessment years as well. Assessing Officer was of the opinion that since additional depreciation on the machinery was allowed in the assessment years relevant to the previous year when it was installed, there was no question of any further additional depreciation being granted in any of the subsequent years, including the impugned assessment year. Thus, the additional depreciation of Rs. 26,33,507/- claimed by the assessee M/s CRI Pumps (P) Limited and Rs. 86,99,846/- claimed by M/s Ransar Industries Ltd. were disallowed. 4. In their appeals before CIT(Appeals), argument taken by the assessees was that additional depreciation was admissible for machinery p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 6.1.2012. 7. In reply, learned A.R. submitted that the Tribunal had not considered the amended law in the said decision and therefore, reliance on such order of the Tribunal was misplaced. 8. We have perused the orders and heard the rival submissions. There is no dispute that the additional depreciation claimed by the assessees, for impugned assessment year, were on machinery already acquired during the years 2002-03 to 2004-05 and 2005-06. Thus, in the previous year relevant to impugned assessment year, the machinery were no more new. Claim of the assessees is that under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act, additional depreciation for new plant and machinery acquired was available in every year after its installation if such installation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the claim of additional depreciation is that it should be on a new machinery or plant. A machinery is new only when it is first put to use. Once it is used, it is no longer a new machinery. Admittedly, the machinery, on which additional depreciation has been claimed, was already used in various preceding previous years. Therefore, for the impugned assessment year, it is no more a new machinery or plant. Once it is not a new machinery or plant, allowance under Section 32(1)(iia) cannot be allowed. Additional depreciation itself is only for a new machinery or plant. A claim of additional depreciation as made by the assessee, if allowed, will not be an allowance for a new machinery or plant. Intention of the Legislature was to give such addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
