Shrinath Gum & Chemicals v. ITO

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2013 TaxPub(DT) 1511 (Jod-Trib) : (2013) 051 (II) ITCL 0613 Income Tax Act, 1961 --Depreciation Rate Civil work consisting of construction of windmill foundation, control room, road, supply and installation of HT electrical yard and transmission line--Assessee claimed depreciation @ 80% on foundation as well as other civil works. Assessing officer and Commissioner (Appeals) denied the claim on the ground that civil works were not integral part of windmill. *Held :* Issue was remitted back to assessing officer with a direction to allow higher depreciation as claimed by assessee on the civil works consisting of construction of windmill, foundation, transformer, plinth, control room, etc. and supply and installation of HT electrical yards and transmission line from windmill to grid inter-connection point as it was considered as part of the windmill. Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 32 Income Tax Act, 1961 --Depreciation --Rate On power evacuation charges and contribution for power evacuation infrastructure facility--Assessee claimed depreciation on power evacuation charges and contribution for power evacuation infrastructure facility @ 80%. Assessing officer disallowed the same. *Held :* Issue was to be considered afresh after providing opportunity to the assessee as to whether it can be considered as part of the accessories of windmill without which windmill cannot function. Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 32 Income Tax Act, 1961 --Depreciation --Allowability Sub-lease/stamp duty registration charges --assessing officer disallowed depreciation relating to land, on which assessee claimed depreciation @ 80%. *Held :* If expenditure relates to land then no depreciation was allowable and therefore, issue was restored back to assessing officer for consideration, since no details were filed before Tribunal. Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 32 Income Tax Act, 1961 --Survey--Excess stock found Bill produced during assessment proceedings --During survey under section 133A, excess stock was found and no explanation received from assessee, therefore, assessing officer made addition to the income. Assessing officer viewed that bill in respect of stock which was produced during the assessment proceedings and not on the date of survey, could be false. Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the addition holding that by expressing a consent to surrender the excess stock for taxation, C partner of the firm induced the authority concerned to stop from proceeding further to verify the facts subsequently disclosed by assessee. Any enquiry after lapse of substantial time gap-may not reveal the real state of affairs. Therefore, assessee cannot be allowed to raise new plea that certain stock purchased on the date of the survey was not recorded in the books of account and there was no excess stock. *Held :* assessing officer was not justified in making addition as assessee had filed the copy of the bill and the bill showed that the goods had been transported through truck during assessment proceedings, therefore, without collecting any adverse material, assessing officer could not have made the addition. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2013 TaxPub(DT) 1511 (Jod-Trib) : (2013) 051 (II) ITCL 0613

Income Tax Act, 1961

--Depreciation Rate Civil work consisting of construction of windmill foundation, control room, road, supply and installation of HT electrical yard and transmission line--Assessee claimed depreciation @ 80% on foundation as well as other civil works. Assessing officer and Commissioner (Appeals) denied the claim on the ground that civil works were not integral part of windmill. Held : Issue was remitted back to assessing officer with a direction to allow higher depreciation as claimed by assessee on the civil works consisting of construction of windmill, foundation, transformer, plinth, control room, etc. and supply and installation of HT electrical yards and transmission line from windmill to grid inter-connection point as it was considered as part of the windmill.

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 32

Income Tax Act, 1961

--Depreciation --Rate On power evacuation charges and contribution for power evacuation infrastructure facility--Assessee claimed depreciation on power evacuation charges and contribution for power evacuation infrastructure facility @ 80%. Assessing officer disallowed the same. Held : Issue was to be considered afresh after providing opportunity to the assessee as to whether it can be considered as part of the accessories of windmill without which windmill cannot function.

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 32

Income Tax Act, 1961

--Depreciation --Allowability Sub-lease/stamp duty registration charges --assessing officer disallowed depreciation relating to land, on which assessee claimed depreciation @ 80%. Held : If expenditure relates to land then no depreciation was allowable and therefore, issue was restored back to assessing officer for consideration, since no details were filed before Tribunal.

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 32

Income Tax Act, 1961

--Survey--Excess stock found Bill produced during assessment proceedings --During survey under section 133A, excess stock was found and no explanation received from assessee, therefore, assessing officer made addition to the income. Assessing officer viewed that bill in respect of stock which was produced during the assessment proceedings and not on the date of survey, could be false. Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the addition holding that by expressing a consent to surrender the excess stock for taxation, C partner of the firm induced the authority concerned to stop from proceeding further to verify the facts subsequently disclosed by assessee. Any enquiry after lapse of substantial time gap-may not reveal the real state of affairs. Therefore, assessee cannot be allowed to raise new plea that certain stock purchased on the date of the survey was not recorded in the books of account and there was no excess stock. Held : assessing officer was not justified in making addition as assessee had filed the copy of the bill and the bill showed that the goods had been transported through truck during assessment proceedings, therefore, without collecting any adverse material, assessing officer could not have made the addition.