9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1190X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich was to be allowed after giving appeal effect of the ITAT order [2011 (11) TMI 725 - ITAT JODHPUR], the Ld. CIT(A) rightly directed the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation after considering the decision of the ITAT and recalculate the allowable depreciation on the wind mill. We do not see any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. - Decided against revenue Deduction u/s 80IA from the profit of eligible business - Held that:- The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Emerald Jewel Industries (P) Ltd. reported in (2010 (8) TMI 648 - Madras High Court) held that the assessee-company is eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the Act in respect of wind mill installed by it and unabsorbed depreciation of the ea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} <![endif]--> SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. For the Appellant : Shri U.C. Jain, Shri Gautam Baid Shri Rajendra Jain For the Respondent : Shri N.A. Joshi - D.R. O R D E R PER N.K. SAINI, A.M This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 26/08/2013 of Ld. CIT(A), Jodhpur. 2 Registry pointed out that this appeal is barred by limitation of 11 days. Learned D.R. submitted that there was no delay in filing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere is brought forward unabsorbed depreciation. 4. First issue vide Ground No. 1 relates to the allowance of depreciation on foundation and other civil work of wind mill. 5. Facts relating to this issue, in brief, are that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had shown unabsorbed brought forward depreciation of ₹ 36,30,106/- for A.Y. 2006-07 and ₹ 48,36,597/- for the A.Y. 2007-08. However, as per assessment order for A.Y. 2008-09 the same is at ₹ 23,92,806/- for A.Y. 2006-07 and ₹ 39,98,200/- for A.Y. 2007-08. Accordingly, excess depreciation of ₹ 20,75,697/- i.e. ₹ 12,37,300/- for A.Y. 2006-07 and ₹ 8,38,397/- for A.Y. 2007-08 claimed by the assessee was disallowed. 6. Being a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o not see any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 8. The next issue vide Ground No. 2 relates to the deduction u/s 80IA of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act in short) from the profit of eligible business. 9. Facts relating to this issue, in brief, are that the assessee claimed the deduction u/s 80IA of the Act for a sum of ₹ 17,90,010/- from the income generated on wind mill. The Assessing Officer held that brought forward unabsorbed depreciation was first to be set off against the profit of the eligible business and then from the balance profit deduction u/s 80IA of the Act was to be allowed. Since in the present case, the profit of the eligible business against which brought forward u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
