9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 723X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the purpose of its business. So when a leasing or finance company, which owns the machinery, leases it to the third parties who use the same for manufacture in accordance with Section 32A(2)(b)(iii), the former is entitled to investment allowance in respect of such machinery under Section 32A. - Decided in favour of the Assessee Additional depreciation on the assets leased out by the assessee - Held that:- The decision of Shaan Finance (P.) Ltd. (1998 (3) TMI 8 - SUPREME Court ) is squarely applicable to the claim of additional deprecation. The question is, accordingly, answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. Extra shift allowance of depreciation - Held that:- Supreme Court, in the cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) directing the AO to re-compute the disallowance under Rule 6D of the I.T. Rules by taking into account all the tours made by the employees and not on the basis of individual tours ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) directing to allow additional depreciation on the assets leased out by the assessee ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) directing to allow the extra allowance on the assets leased out by the assessee ? 2 The re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of the Assessee, for another Assessment Year, was referred to this Court and by its judgment dated 28 February 2005 (in ITR No.390 of 1995 CIT vs. Industrial Credit Investment Corporation of India Ltd.) answered in the affirmative, relying on the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Shaan Finance (P.) Ltd. (231 ITR 308). The Supreme Court had held in that case that where the business of the Assessee consists of hiring out machinery, or where the income derived by the assessee from the hiring of any machinery is business income, the assessee must be considered as having used the machinery for the purpose of its business. So when a leasing or finance company, which owns the machinery, leases it to the third parties who use ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame before the Apex Court. In the Revenue's appeal from the order of the Madras High Court, its view was affirmed while hearing it along with Shaan Finance (P) Ltd. (supra). Therefore, the decision of Shaan Finance (P.) Ltd. (supra) is squarely applicable to the claim of additional deprecation. The question is, accordingly, answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. Re Question 4 : 7 Here, again, the Assessing Officer denied the Assessee's claim on the ground that the assessee company itself had not worked in extra shifts. The Supreme Court, in the case of CIT vs. Maharashtra Apex Corporation Ltd. (254 ITR 98), following the ratio of Shaan Finance (P.) Ltd. (supra), has held that the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
