9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Central Government through Central Excise Exemption. HELD THAT:- The factual position in these appeals are identical to the facts involved in the case of Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. [ 2019 (8) TMI 107 - DELHI HIGH COURT] as held that since excise refund is in the nature of revenue receipt forming part of profits and gains arising from the business, it cannot be reduced from the cost of plant machinery Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that assessee s claim of depreciation is allowable. Even, otherwise also, the disallowance of depreciation would only enhance the profit of the assessee, which is otherwise eligible for claim of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. In fact, in case of Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), Hon ble juris ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of flexible laminates. The Assessing Officer has further stated that the assessee came into existence as a result of demerger of the rubber thread unit of M/s Dharmpal Satyapal Ltd. in a scheme of demerger approved by the Hon ble Delhi High Court vide order dated 11.09.2007. In course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer, while verifying the return of income filed by the assessee as well as the audited financial statements, noticed that the assessee has claimed depreciation amounting to Rs.3,96,19,664/-. From the audit report, the Assessing Officer noticed that depreciation has been claimed in respect of various blocks of assets comprising of building, factory, furniture fixture and plant and machinery. He observed that in cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 43(1) of the Act, the actual cost of such assets to the resulting company i.e. the assessee shall be nil as the entire cost of the assets has been met by the Central Government through Central Excise Exemption. On the aforesaid premises, the Assessing Officer disallowed assessee s claim of depreciation. 5. Contesting the aforesaid disallowance, the assessee preferred appeal before Learned First Appellate Authority. After considering the submission of the assessee and the facts and material available on record, learned First Appellate Authority having found that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee in past Assessment Years, followed the same and decided the appeals. 6. Before us, learned Departmental Representative s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal High Court, the issue has to be decided in favour of the assessee. 8. We have considered rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench and the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in case of M/s. Abhisar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. on identical issue. Undisputedly, the assessee came into existence as a result of demerger of M/s Dharmpal Satyapal Ltd. in a scheme of demerger approved by the Hon ble Delhi High Court vide order dated 11.09.2007, effective from 01st April, 2006. As per the scheme of demerger, the building, plant and machinery and other assets of the flexible packaging unit came to the assessee company. The issue which is arising for consideratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espect of the rubber thread unit and flexible packaging unit will go to reduce the cost of the assets. Hence, the actual cost of the assets to the assessee would be after deduction of the amount of Central Excise duty exemption given by the Central Government. 10. In the backdrop of Revenue s aforesaid contentions, the issue has to be examined. It is to be noted that the Central Excise Exemption was availed by M/s Dharampal Satyapal Ltd.. The impugned assessment order is completely silent on the aspect as to whether the Central Excise Duty Exemption availed by M/s Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. was reduced from the actual cost of the assets in the books of M/s Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. Admittedly, on the effective date of demerger i.e. 01st April, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment Year 2014-15 in ITA No.5825/Del/2017, order dated 10.09.2021 and for Assessment Year 2015-16, in ITA No.2419/Del/2018 dated 15.09.2021. Having carefully examined the facts and materials on record, we do not find any factual difference between appeal relating to impugned assessment year and the appeals for past assessment years decided by the Tribunal in the orders referred to above. Thus, respectfully following the consistent view of the Tribunal in assessee's own case up to Assessment Year 2015-16, we uphold the decision of learned First Appellate Authority by dismissing the ground raised by the Revenue. 10. In our view, the factual position in these appeals are identical to the facts involved in the case of Abhisar Buildwell P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
