9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeals are being take up by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The revenue has raised following grounds in both the appeals: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is bad in law. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 17,36,202/- made by the A.O. and allowing depreciation @ 50% on machinery claimed to have been purchased under TUFS. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the use of words processing and garment sector are wide enough to include in its ambit utilization of machinery in any activity in textile industry to be el ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not in accordance with provisions of the Act. The AO also distinguished the case law relied upon by the assessee. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee by considering the para 6 of part -A-III of new Appendix-1 of Income Tax Rules, Resolution of Ministry of Textiles No.28/1/99-VTI dated 31.03.1999 and decisions relied upon by the assessee and the explanation submitted by the assessee. 6. The Ld. DR, Sh. Tarsem Lal, appearing for the Revenue argued and invited our attention to Income Tax Rules in new Appendix-1 where rates at which depreciation is admissible has been mentioned as machinery and plant used in weaving, processing and garment sector of textiles industry which is purchased under TUFS on or after the Ist day of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urat vs. Shri Dungarbhai Harjibhai Italia (HUF), Surat, dated 12.08.2011. iv) ACIT Cir.2, Surat Vs. M/s. Anita Exports, Surat, ITA No.2892/AHD/2009 for the A.Y. 2006-07, dated 08/07/2011. 7.1. The Ld. counsel for the assessee, further relied upon the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of S.S.M. Brothers (P) Ltd. and Others vs. CIT reported in 243 ITR 418 and in the case of CIT vs. Oracle Software India Ltd. reported at 320 ITR 546 (SC). He also invited our attention to various orders done by the A.O. available at pages 16 to 65 of the paper book where the A.O. on identical issues in different cases of assessees had allowed higher depreciation of 50% in the same i.e. Amritsar charge. 8. In the rejoinder, the Ld. DR a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... guments made by the Ld. DR, Sh. Tarsem Lal, were not found convincing. Once the Ministry of Textiles had submitted the circular for including Fabric, Embroidery Machines and the banks had also sanctioned loan under TUF Scheme and had received subsidy under TUFS. As regards the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Ahmedabad relied upon by the ld. counsel for the assessee, the issue is covered by the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Ahmedabad C Bench in ITA No.2892/Ahd./2009 dated 08.07.2011, in which on identical issue, the higher depreciation was claimed by the assessee which was rejected by the AO and the ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee and the Tribunal in the said appeal had dismissed the appeal of the Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
