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

2023 (6) TMI 478

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wo issues are involved in this matter. First one is in respect of the claim of the assessee for depreciation under section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") on boundary wall and other structures whereas the second one is in respect of the cost of acquisition of the property in respect of which long term capital gains were claimed. Assessee challenged the findings of the learned CIT(A) on the aspect of depreciation on two counts. Firstly vide ground No. 2, it is stated that the impugned order on this aspect is a non-speaking order; whereas merits of such findings are challenged vide ground No. 3. Ground No. 4 relates to the issue of the quantum of cost of acquisition to compute the capital gains. Grounds No. 1 and 5 are ge .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is regard categorically established the fact that the appellant was not eligible to claim depreciation on the expenditure on boundary wall, as in the relevant assessment year the said boundary wall was not put to the business of the assessee. The AO, after discussing the nature and business activities of the appellant Company for which it was created and further referring to the provisions of section 32(1) of the Act vis-a-vis distinguishing the decisions cited by the appellant before him had proved beyond doubt as far as the undersigned is concerned that the appellant had not rightly claimed depreciation and for the detailed facts stated in the assessment order by the AO and reasoning/given on which completely agree, he had justifiably den .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ings vide paragraph No. 5.4 of his order, learned CIT(A) elaborately referred to the submissions made by the assessee before the learned Assessing Officer and also himself and also the reasoning and the conclusions of the learned Assessing Officer on this aspect. Paragraph No. 5.4 of the impugned order is the culmination of the consideration of the learned CIT(A) of all the above. Learned CIT(A) specifically recorded that he was in agreement with the threadbare reasoning given by the learned Assessing Officer. Then it is not necessary for the learned CIT(A) to refer to line by line in the order of the learned Assessing Officer or the submissions of the assessee to say that he does not agree with the assessee and he is convinced by the reaso .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ry wall is to provide protection and security to the building and other assets of the company, which are undoubtedly business assets. Further, the moment the boundary wall is complete, it started serving its purpose and, therefore, it would be, but natural to include the same in the block of assets, land, buildings etc. From the notes to financial statements in respect of the fixed assets at paper No. 12 of the paper book, we notice that there was an addition to the tune of Rs. 19.10 crores in respect of which the depreciation at Rs. 1.97 crores was claimed. Further it is shown in the notes on financials, as one of the significant accounting policies, that the tangible fixed assets are carried at the cost of acquisition or construction less .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd the actual extent of land was found to be Ac. 3.33 guntas and under a compromise agreement, 40% thereof fell to the share of the assessee, which the assessee sold. Learned Assessing Officer allowed the cost of acquisition only to such an extent of 40% of land that was sold and disallowed the rest of the same. 12. Learned CIT(A) considered this issue in detail and held that the assessee is not entitled to claim the indexed cost of acquisition in respect of which the assessee had no right, title or interest. Learned CIT(A) accordingly, upheld the findings of the learned Assessing Officer. 13. It is contended before us by the learned AR that whatever the price that was paid by the assessee for acquisition of land, that was claimed for ind .....

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