9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the assessee-company purchased plant and machinery for ₹ 75,44,577/- upto 31-03-2002 which were shown under the head capital work in progress during the year AY 2002-03. After 31-03-2002 the assessee purchased the plant and machinery amounting to ₹ 98,67,031/-. Thus, the assessee purchased the total plant and machinery worth ₹ 1,74,11,608/- and installed them during the assessment year under consideration after September, 2002, and claimed additional depreciation amounting to ₹ 13,05,871/-. The AO was of the view that as per the provisions of section 32(1)(iia) the assessee has to acquire and install new plant machinery after 31-03-2002. Since the assessee has not acquired and installed the whole of the new ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h ₹ 75,44,577/- before 31-03-2002 and worth ₹ 98,67,031/- after 01-04-2002, both these machineries were installed after 31-03-2002. So far as the plant and machinery worth ₹ 98,67,031/- are concerned, these are acquired as well as installed after 31-03-2002. So far as the machineries worth ₹ 75,44,577/- are concerned, the assessee though acquired these machineries prior to 31-03-2002, but the assessee installed these machineries after 31-03-2002, therefore, both the conditions acquisition as well as installation are fulfilled only after 31-03- 2002 and, therefore, the assessee should be allowed additional depreciation at the rate of 15% during the year under consideration. Regarding the increase in the substantial ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ire and install the plant and machinery after 31-03-2002. If the plant and machinery are acquired and installed after 31-03-2002, the assessee will be entitled for the additional depreciation subject to the fulfillment of the conditions regarding the substantial expansion in the installed capacity. Since the words used are acquired and installed , therefore, both the conditions must be satisfied for the claim of additional depreciation. The machineries must have been acquired as well as installed. The machinery can be said to have been acquired and installed after 31-03-2002 if the machinery is installed after 31-03-2002. There is no dispute so far as the machinery worth ₹ 98,67,031/- are concerned. The machinery has been purchased b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion has been correctly claimed in accordance with the provisions of this Clause. Under Rule 5(a) Form 3AA has been prescribed. Therefore, if the assessee submits the report of the Chartered Accountant in Form No.3AA certifying the installed capacity, in our opinion, that will be the conclusive evidence that the installed capacity of the assessee has increased in accordance with form No.3AA until and unless the AO proves that the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant is incorrect. The assessee has clearly pointed out that there was an error in the figures given under the Balance- Sheet. The figures given in the Balance-Sheet can not replace the figures specifically certified by the Chartered Accountant in the prescribed Form. We ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that he has furnished the details of the additions, copy of Inspection Report, relevant labour bills. The labour bill work was undertaken much prior to 31-3-2003. The labour has been undertaken on 29-9-2001, 12-11-2001, 25-2-2002, 29-5-2002 and 27-6-2002. It was pointed out that the labour contractor M/s Krishna Engineers has clarified that the work undertaken had been completed much before the final bill given by them. The final bill was issued subsequently much after the completion of the labour work. Thus, it was contended that the final labour bill if dated 31-3-2003 will not prove that the machinery has not been installed prior to 31-3-2003. The machinery has duly been installed and used by the assessee during the year, therefore, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the depreciation amounting to ₹ 21,76,451/-. 11 The third ground relates to the claim of gratuity amount of ₹ 85,798/-. At the time of hearing, the learned AR submitted before us the approval granted by the CIT to the assessee s Employees Group Gratuity-cum-Life Assurance Scheme and thus it was pointed out that this is set up by the assessee was duly approved as per the Income-tax Act with effect from 1-5-1999 and therefore the assessee should be allowed deduction for the same. The learned DR was fair enough to concede the position. We accordingly delete the disallowance of ₹ 85,798/-. Thus, this ground stands allowed. 12 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court toda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
