9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the first year of installation. The assessee is entitled for 50% of the additional depreciation and there is no restriction to claim the additional depreciation, if otherwise available, to the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 6438/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 1-6-2015 - Joginder Singh, JM And N. K. Billaiya, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Ms Sonalee Godbole For the Respondent : Shri Ajit Kumar Srivastava ORDER Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 5th August 2013, of the learned first appellate authority, Mumbai, directing the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee to carry forward balance 50% of its claim of additional depreciation and allow it in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome of ₹ 26,34,32,387, u/s 115JB of the Act. The assessee claimed additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) of the Act. The learned Commissioner invoking revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act, directed the Assessing Officer not to allow carry forward of unclaimed depreciation pursuant to the direction disallowed the additional depreciation and restricted to 10% on the ground that the plant and machinery was put to use after 30th September 2006. Thus, the period is less than 180 days. Therefore, only restricted rate shall be applicable. On appeal, before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), by following the decision for the assessment year 2009-10, the issue was decided in favour of the assessee. The Revenue is aggriev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A no.2789/Mum./2013), order dated 13th May 2013. Thus, the assessee is entitled to depreciation in the subsequent year, if the entire depreciation is not allowed in the first year of installation. The ratio laid down in ITO v/s M/s. Aswani Industries (ITA no.140/Ahd./2013) order dated 31st May 2013, further supports the claim of the assessee. The ratio laid down in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v/s ACIT, (2014) 45 taxmann.com 337 (Cochin)(Trib.) further supports the case of the assessee. If the ratio laid down in the aforesaid cases is kept juxtaposition with the facts before us, we are of the view that the assessee is entitled for 50% of the additional depreciation and there is no restriction to claim the additional depreciation, if otherwise availabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
