9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 249X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al to the revenue. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not deleting the addition on account of donation to the tune of Rs.17,57,464 as the said addition has been done by the Ld. AO whimsically without assigning any reasons for the same and the fact that the assessment order has to be a reasoned order. 2. Registry has informed that the assessee has filed this appeal belatedly by 12 days for which delay a condonation petition has been placed on record. The delay was due to indisposition of the professional handling the assessee's case as per the Affidavit brought on record. The delay is therefore condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. The brief facts as have been brought on record are that the assessee carried on the activity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... below insofar as the assessee was holdingn license to explore a plot of land leased out to the OMDC being a Government undertaking the land belonging to the Government. The leased amount was agreed to be paid in 1993 amounting to Rs.2.81 Crores when actual operation of exploring the land began in 1999-2000. The actual claim of depreciation began from Assessment Year 2003-04 when the period of lease was considered for claiming depletion in the form of depreciation @ Rs.14,05,000. The Assessing Officer computed the same up to the impugned Assessment Year holding that a sum of Rs.1.44 Crores remain short claimed when the assessee has chosen to spread the amount as amortized being the lease hold rights against equity held by OMDC. He tried to c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nning Assessment Year 1998-99. As pointed out earlier, writing off of depletion in the value of the asset is the sole prerogative of the assessee which depreciation, a name given, has to be allowed could only be charged in the P & L account could not be subjected to scrutiny for the purpose of increasing the rate of depreciation or disallowing the WDV. There is no controversy in respect to the asset being a leased hold right to excavate and explore the land which the Government owns and the land leased out to OMDC who in its turn have allowed the lessee to lease it out, by no stretch of imagination can be held to be the asset in the hands of the assessee. The lease hold rights being intangible assets were to be written off during the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee for the simple reason that the denial of claim of depreciation has been made on misinterpretation of law and the applicability thereof. Explanation to Section 32(1)(ii) leans in favour of the assessee to the extent that it is the actual action of put to use which entitles the assessee to claim depreciation. A straight line method of claiming the writing off of lease hold rights for the period of lease cannot be denied to the assessee for the simple reason it being intangible asset has been written off which pertains to land being a intangible asset. It is nobody's case that the land either belonged to the lessee or to the Government. This simply indicates that a depletion of the land ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
