9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2741X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowing components / constituents of windmill - Installation, Civil work, MEDA Processing fee, MEDA Application fee, Electrical Installation, Labour charges for erection and installation, Labour charge for final testing AND Other Pre-operation Expenses capitalized - Decided partly in favour of assessee - ITA No. 1294/PN/2014 - - - Dated:- 28-10-2015 - SHRI R.K. PANDA, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM For The Assessee : Shri Nikhil Pathak For The Revenue : Shri B.C. Malakar ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolhapur dated 13-01-2014 for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The facts of the case as emanating from the record a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ri Nikhil Pathak appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted, that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in restricting the rate of depreciation claimed at 80% on foundation, electrical installation and other related components of windmill. The ld. AR submitted that apart from windmill unit, the assessee had claimed depreciation @ 80% on the following components:- Sr. No. Particulars Building Amount Rs. Plant Machinery Amount Rs. 1. Installation, Civil work 13,78,381 8,69,216 2. MEDA Processing fee 3,00,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esenting the Department vehemently supported the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee. 5. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below. We have also considered the decisions on which the ld. AR has placed reliance in support of his submissions. The assessee has installed windmill and has claimed depreciation @ 80% on windmill and other components / constituents of windmill. The Assessing Officer restricted the claim of depreciation on the following components of windmill as under:- Sr. No. Particulars Depreciation claimed @ 80% Rs. 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant M. Jadhav (supra), the coordinate Bench after placing reliance on the decision of M/s. Western Precicast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. JCIT (supra), has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. The relevant extract of the order of Tribunal in ITA No.166/PN/2012 reads as under:- 5. We have heard the parties. We find that the identical issue has been considered by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Western Precicast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. JCIT, Range-I, Sangli, ITA No. 1495/PN/2011 order dated 30-01-2013. The Tribunal followed the decision in the assessee own case for the A.Y. 2007-08. The operative part of the Tribunal s decision is as under: 4. We have heard the rival parties. The Ld. Counsel submits that in assessee s own case for the A.Y. 2007-08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from Windmill to Grid interconnection point including HT metering for 1.25 MW WINDMILL AT LOCATION No. K437 at above site address. 30,93,500/- 2. 30-03-2006 Labour charges towards final testing and commissioning for 1.25 MW windmill at Loc No. K437. 1,10,200/- 3. 30-03-2006 Towards labour charges for work executed, for erection and installation of windmill consisting of : Unloading and safe keeping of material, Assembly, erection and installation of windmill tower and wind turbine generator for 1.25 MW windmill at Location No K-437 at above site address. 14,32,600/- 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection and installation of windmill. Such expenditure forms integral part of cost of the windmill and therefore, there is no mistake on the part of the CIT(A) to have considered such expenditure as eligible for depreciation at 80%. 5. We therefore following the order of the Tribunal cited supra hold that both the parties below were not justified in calculating and disallowing the depreciation on the cost of foundation, commissioning and erection of the wind mill. Accordingly, we allowed the issue in favour of the assessee and delete the addition made by the A.O. by making the disallowance towards alleged excess claim of depreciation. 6. In our opinion, the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly allowed the claim of the assessee, as issue arisin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
