9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould not have tampered with the WDV of the Building Block of Assets based on a valuation report prepared for a different purpose. The addition is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case and hence, the same is directed to be deleted. Addition being unpaid service tax liability u/s 43-B - HELD THAT:- After hearing the rival submissions, we are of the view that the addition cannot be sustained. In CIT Vs Noble And Hewitt (I) (P) Ltd.. [ 2007 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT] the assessee maintained a mercantile system of accounting and held in view of the provisions of Section 43B since the assessed had not claimed a deduction there was no question of disallowing the deduction which was not even claimed. The case of Bor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MORE THAN 180 DAYS 7,51,689 LESS THAN 180 DAYS 9,45,822 GROSS VALUE( A) 3,74,44,882 LESS: DEPRECIATION FULL RATE @10%- RS.(3,57,47,371+7,51,689) 36,49,906 HALF RATE @5% RS.9,45,822 47,291 TOTAL DEPRECIATION( B) 36,97,197 NET WDV AS ON 31.03.2015 (A-B) 3,37,47,685 WDV AS ON 01.04.2015 3,37,47,685 ADDITION: MORE THAN 180 DAYS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me. Opening W.D.V. as on 01/04/2014 Rs. 3,48,00,000/- Less : Depreciation 10% Rs. 34,80,000/- Closing W.D.V. as on 31/03/2015 Rs. 3,13,20,000/- Opening W D V as on 01/04/2015 Rs. 3,13,20,000/- Less : Depreciation @ 10% Rs. 31,32,000/- Closing W.D.V. as on 31/03/2016 Rs. 2,81,88,000/- Therefore the actual depreciation to be allowed is taken at Rs.31,32,000/- as against Rs.34,51,208/- reported in Schedule DOA of the balance sheet and Closing W.D.V. as on 31/03/2016 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the view that as per the provisions of section 43(1)(6) WDV of an asset as per the books of accounts has to be arrived at only by adding to opening WDV assets acquired during the previous year and reducing the value of assets sold or discarded during the previous year and thereafter closing WDV has to be arrived at after providing for depreciation. Sec.32 of the Act mandates depreciation to be allowed as deduction on the W DV as understood under section 43(1)(6) of the Act. The AO therefore could not have tampered with the WDV of the Building Block of Assets based on a valuation report prepared for a different purpose. The addition is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case and hence, the same is directed to be deleted. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the previous year relevant to the assessment year in question. Out of the service tax so collected the assessed had deposited part of the amount but an amount of Rs. 14.40 lakhs was not deposited by the assessed with the concerned authorities. The assessed did not claim any deduction in this regard nor did it debit the amount as an expenditure in the Profit Loss Account. The assessing officer as well as the Commissioner (Appeals) ( Commissioner (Appeals) ) nevertheless disallowed the amount and added it back to the income of the assessed. The Commissioner (Appeals) was of the view that the assessee had not followed the correct accounting procedure. If it had done so, the amount would have had to be debited to Profit Loss Account an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessed was maintaining accounts on the mercantile system it would be entitled to deduction of the estimated liability of sales tax, even though such sales tax had not been paid to the sales tax authorities. 10. The Court held that the assesse who has not even claimed any deduction on the ground of service tax and has not debited the amount to its Profit Loss Account, the Revenue cannot invoke sec.43B of the Act. The Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Knight Frank (India) Pvt.Ltd., ITA Nop.247 of 2014 judgment dated 16.8.2016 and in the case of CIT Vs. Ovira Logistics Pvt.Ltd. ITA No.1023 of 2013 judgment dated 17.4.2015 also took a similar view. The decision rendered by the SMC Bench in the case of M/s. Wyzmindz Solution ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
