9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner is a company deriving income from manufacturing and trading in steel tube and pipes and in generation of electricity. The petitioner filed its return of income on 30th September, 2008 declaring total income of Rs. 110,98,00,114/- along with return of fringe benefits, showing taxable value of fringe benefits at Rs. 84,32,903/-. The return of income was accompanied by a tax audit report under section 44AB of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment by issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act. After making detailed inquiry, on 15.03.2010, the Assessing Officer framed assessment under section 143(2) of the Act assessing the petitioner's income at Rs. 111,06,60,607/- after making addition of Rs. 8,60,493/- by order d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fully and truly all material facts without stating as to what is the nature of the failure on the part of the petitioner in disclosing all relevant facts. The attention of the court was invited to the statements submitted along with the return of the income filed by the petitioner to point out that the additional depreciation of 10% claimed in respect of the windmill was clearly stated therein. It was submitted that thus there being no failure on the part of the petitioner in disclosing fully and truly all material facts, the reopening of assessment beyond the period of four years is clearly without jurisdiction. Reliance was placed upon the decision of this court in the case of Vinay Printing Press v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der section 32(1)(iia), only an assessee who is engaged in the business of manufacturing or production of any article or thing is entitled to claim additional depreciation of 20% in respect of plant and machinery acquired by him. Reverting to the facts of the case it was submitted that the windmill in question was utilized to generate electricity and not for the purpose of manufacturing any article or thing and hence, the petitioner was not entitled to additional depreciation thereon. It was submitted that at the relevant time, during the course of scrutiny assessment, the petitioner failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts relevant for its assessment as it had failed to invite the attention of the Assessing Officer to the clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts with regard to the alleged wrongful claim for additional depreciation in respect of the windmill. 7. From the facts narrated hereinabove, it is apparent that the petitioner had clearly shown that it had claimed additional depreciation of Rs. 175.29 lakhs on the windmill. Evidently, therefore, there does not appear to be any failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully and truly all material facts. From the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respondent, the case of the respondent primarily is that the assessee had wrongly claimed additional depreciation in respect of the wind-mill. Thus, in effect and substance the assessment is sought to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
