9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1907X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e additional depreciation @ 10% in claimed depreciation in AY. 2011-12 - HELD THAT:- As decided in assessee own case [ 2016 (8) TMI 1574 - ITAT MUMBAI] following the ratio of VMT Ltd.( 2009 (9) TMI 35 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] issue has been decided in favour of assessee with regard to addition depreciation u/s.32(1)(iia) of the Act. Hon ble Supreme Court in case of CST vs. M.P. Electricity Board ( 1968 (11) TMI 85 - SUPREME COURT] held that the electricity generated by an assessee is an article or goods. The explanation to amendments (memorandum) as inserted by Finance Act, 2012 as relied upon by CIT(A) cannot be said to overrule and earlier decision of Hon ble High Court. An amendment that has prospective application cannot be said to retrospe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red by allowing the additional depreciation for wind mills u/s. 32(1)(iia) for AY. 2011-12, when the same is allowed as per the provision of the Act and Memorandum to the Finance Act, 2012 in relation to AY. 2013-14 and subsequent assessment years only. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred by relying on the decision of CIT Vs. VTM Ltd. (319 ITR 336), wherein the facts of the case were different being the case of textile manufacturer whereas the assessee is a trader and hence the decision relied upon is not applicable being distinguishable on facts". 3. We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Briefly stated facts are that assessee is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case, wherein it was held as under: "2.1 Next issue is with regard to additional depreciation of Rs.2,19,29,891/- on two windmills acquired and installed by assessee during the year, which was confirmed by CIT(A). As stated above, assessee is engaged in the business of generation of power. During the year two windmills were acquired and installed. Assessee claimed additional depreciation of Rs.2,19,29,891/- u/s.32(1)(iia). Assessing Officer disallowed same by relying of the decision of Tamilnadu Chlorates [2006] 98 ITD 1 (Chennai) (Trib.). CIT(A) upheld the disallowance by relying upon the explanatory notes (memorandum) to amen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts of an assessee qua it's explanatory notes. Where there is no ambiguity in the Section, there is no warrant for resort to external aids of interpretation namely the notes on clauses and the memorandum explaining its provisions. In the light of decision of VTM Ltd.(supra) with regard to claim of additional depreciation u/s.32(1)(iia) for setting up a windmill, wherein material being sole decision by Hon'ble High Court on the matter, we hold that additional depreciation should be allowed". 5.1. As the issue is squarely covered by the Tribunal's decision in assessee's own case for immediately preceding assessment year, additional depreciation has rightly been allowed by the CIT(A). Similar are the facts in the case of Shri Atul Shivdas Gan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
