Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1989 (1) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Tribunal. Application No. R. A. 281 (Coch) of 1981 arises out of I.T.A. No. 558 of 1978-79 and R. A. No. 282 (Coch) of 1981 arises out of I.T.A. No. 567 of 1978-79 whereas R.A. No. 283 (Coch) of 1981 is from I.T.A. No. 319 (Coch) of 1979. The facts as disclosed from the statement of case are as under : The assessee is running a rubber factory and claimed depreciation, extra shift allowance and development rebate, among other items, on water supply system and miscellaneous equipment as under : Water supply system Rs. 74,699 Miscellaneous equipment Rs. 5,977 The assessee claimed depreciation on these items at the rate of 15% which is the rate applicable to general machinery and plant in a rubber factory. The Income-tax Officer and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he assessee is not entitled to depreciation on the cost of roads and fences. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed the claim of the assessee against which the Revenue appealed and lost. The Appellate Tribunal held that the roads should be treated as part of the building and, therefore, eligible for depreciation. The Appellate Tribunal also held that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on fences as well. The plant of the assessee was commissioned on March 18, 1974, and the accounting year of the assessee ended on December 31, 1974. Therefore, while allowing the relief under section 80J, the Income-tax Officer took into consideration the fact that the plant was commissioned only on March 18, 1974, and restricted the relief for t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that relief under section 80J is to be allowed at a flat rate of 6% for each assessment year irrespective of the duration of the period during which the undertaking works during the previous year ? In R. A. No. 283 (Coch) of 1981 for the assessment year 1976-77: (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to the special rate of depreciation on the water supply system and the miscellaneous equipment inclusive of the weighing machine ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to extra shift allowance on water supply system ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t 15%. There is no contention that if water supply system and miscellaneous equipment are part of the rubber factory, extra shift allowance and development rebate are not allowable. There is also no dispute that the items of machinery and plant are new machinery. The Tribunal directed the Income-tax Officer to determine the development rebate on these items of machinery and allow the same to be carried forward subject to the assessee satisfying the necessary conditions. We have heard counsel for the Revenue as well as the assessee. The question relating to section 80J relief, it is agreed by counsel for the Revenue, is covered in favour of the assessee, by the decisions in CIT v. Simpson and Co. [1980] 122 ITR 283 (Mad), CIT v. English In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2) [1977] 110 ITR 346 and of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Indo-Burma Petroleum Co. Ltd. [1978] 112 ITR 755, which have held that roads should be treated as part of the building, found that the assessee would be entitled to depreciation on roads. Similarly, following the decision in CIT v. Caltex Oil Refining (I.) Ltd. [1976] 102 ITR 260 (Bom), the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to depreciation on fences. The Tribunal also held that the assessee erected fences for protecting its property and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to depreciation on fences as well. But a Bench of this court in CIT v. Periyar Chemicals Ltd. [1987] 164 ITR 174 (Ker), considering the above decisions, held that (at p. 177) "Ordinarily, roads a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates