9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 1077X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taken by the assessee are dismissed. Classification of cold storage building and resultant rate of depreciation - Held that:- The same issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Coordinate Bench for A.Y. 2005-06 wherein cold storage building have been held as “plant” for the purposes of claiming depreciation. Hence the depreciation @ 15% on cold storage building as claimed by the assessee is sustained. - ITA No.528/JP/14 - - - Dated:- 7-3-2017 - SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM For The Assessee : Shri Navin Garg, Advocate For The Revenue : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) ORDER PER SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd issuance of notice u/s 142(1) dated 16.07.2010 is barred by limitation, therefore the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Bikaner is insupportable in law and on facts. (5) That the ld. CIT(A), Bikaner (camp at Jaipur) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the deduction made by A.O. on account of Back ended Capital Investment Subsidy of ₹ 50 lacs out of the cost of Plant and Machinery and cold storage building. (6) That the ld. CIT(A), Bikaner (camp at Jaipur) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of ₹ 8,32,611/- on account of disallowance of alleged excess claim of depreciation on cold storage building. (7) That the ld. CIT(A), Bikaner (camp at Jaipur) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt in case of CIT vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. reported in (2013) 35 taxmaan.com 616 (Rajasthan). Hence the same is allowed. 5. Regarding ground Nos. 8 9 in respect of claim of deduction u/s 80IB(11) of the Act, the same is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2005- 06. Hence the same is allowed. 6. Regarding ground No.5 wherein the assessee has challenged deduction of Back ended capital investment subsidy of ₹ 50 lacs out of the cost of Plant and Machinery and cold storage building, it is noted that the issue was considered by the Coordinate Bench in A.Y. 2005-06 and which has subsequently been affirmed by the decision of Hon ble Ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onclusion that the AO was not justified in reducing the such amount from the cost right from assessment year 1999-2000 from the block value of such amount of subsidy is liable to be reduced in assessment year 2007-08 i.e. when it is treated as subsidy. The ld. CIT(A) has thus rightly directed the AO to allow the claimed depreciation at ₹ 22,48,421/- for building and plant and machinery for the year consideration n s against ₹ 11,34,887/- allowed by the AO. The first appellate order is reasoned one hence the same is upheld. The ground No.3 is accordingly rejected. The Tribunal has considered that when the subsidy amount was released and adjusted, various communications have been considered which were received on complet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
