9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 1106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g a loss of ₹ 4,48,42,862/-. The return was processed on 13.2.2004 under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (for short 'Act') accepting the loss. The case was selected for scrutiny and on 7.4.2004, a notice under section 143(2) was issued, which was duly served on the assessee. 4. The assessee is engaged in running of hotel Royal Manor at Ahmedabad. In response to the notice, a Chartered Accountant from G.K. Chokshi Co. attended the proceedings and filed details. 5. The assessee claimed depreciation of ₹ 73,40,441/- @ 25% on electric installations of ₹ 2,98,29,841/-. The rate of depreciation on electric installations for A. Y. 2003-2004 was 15% only, and therefore, excess depreciation claimed of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tire block of plant machinery and electrical installations and the other ground was that the assessee has claimed excessive 20% depreciation on hotel building. 9. The assessee filed an application challenging penalty order dated 28.3.2008 passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). The CIT (Appeal), so far as depreciation of 25% on plant machinery and electrical installations was concerned, came to the conclusion that the appellant has initially claimed 25% depreciation in view of tax audit report under form 3CD. However, subsequently by his letter dated 8.3.2006, he has filed revised chart during the assessment proceedings giving the break-up of WDV on block of plant machinery for w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hand, the assessee suo motu has pointed out the mistake and requested for rectification. Therefore, there was no concealment on the part of the assessee. For levying the penalty, the essential ingredient of mens rea was not established and, therefore, no penalty can be levied against the assessee. Therefore, the CIT(A) deleted the penalty of ₹ 11,73,470/- imposed by the assessing officer. 12. The Revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal relied on the decision of the ITAT, Ahmedabad bench in the case of sister concern Marvar Hotels Ltd. in IT Appeal No. 881/AHD/2006 dated 20.10.2006 wherein relying on the decision of Apex Court in Taj Mahal Hotels and Geeta Hotels Pvt. Ltd., it was held by the Tribunal that WDV on b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
