Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI ‘ SMC’ BENCH, RANCHI
Before: SHRI N.S SAINI
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of
the CIT(A), Jamshedpur dated 12.9.2017 for the assessment year
2012-13.
In Ground No.1 of appeal, the grievance of the assesse is that
the CIT(A) erred in not allowing depreciation at higher rate of 30%
to the assesse on Excavators.
P a g e 1 | 6
ITA No. 315/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 13 :
The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer
disallowed depreciation claimed by the assesse on higher rate of
30% on Excavator and, thereby, made an addition of
Rs.10,69,441/-.
On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the same.
Before us, ld A.R. of the assesse has filed copy of order of this
Bench of the Tribunal in the case of the assesse itself for the
assessment year 2010-11 and submitted that the Tribunal vide its
order dated 11.3.2016 passed in ITA No.309/Ran/2014 has
confirmed the order of the CIT(A) in allowing depreciation on
excavator at higher rate of 30% and, therefore, following the same,
the disallowance made should be deleted.
Ld D.R. agreed with the above submission of ld A.R. of the
assesse.
After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the materials
on record, I find that the Tribunal for the assessment year 2010-11
vide its order dated 11.3.2016 in the appeal filed by the revenue
has held as under:
‘ 18. In the assessment order, the AO did not allow higher rate of depreciation as claimed by the assesse. However, the ld CIT(A) directed the AO to allow higher rate of depreciation @ 30% in respect of trucks, trailers and excavators. Hence, the revenue has filed appeal on this ground.
P a g e 2 | 6
ITA No. 315/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 13 :
We have heard both the sides and perused the record of the case. The question before us whether trucks, trailers and excavators as claimed by the assesse would fetch higher rate of depreciation or not? We find that the ITAT Kolkata in the case of M/s. Bothra Shipping Services vs ACIT in ITA Nos.58 -61/Kol/2013 for assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08 order dated 19.12.2014 considered the issue and after discussing various case laws in the said order, held that pay loaders, JCBs and 400V loaders can be classified as plant and machinery for the purpose of depreciation and not as motor bus, motor lorry or any transport/goods vehicles JCB is entitled to higher rate of depreciation claimed by the assesse. Hence, respectfully following the said decision (supra), we uphold the findings of the CIT(A) in allowing higher rate of depreciation. This ground is rejected.’
Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal, I set aside
the orders of lower authorities and allow depreciation at the rate of
30% claimed by the assesse.
In Ground No.2 of appeal, the grievance of the assesse is that
the CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of interest of
Rs.4,36,006/- paid to M/s. SREI Equipment Finance Pvt Ltd., and
M/s. Tata Capital Ltd.,towards payment of instalment of vehicle
finance for non-deduction of tax u/s.194C of the Act by applying the
provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.
The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer
disallowed interest payment of Rs.4,36,006/- to M/s. SREI
Equipments Finance Pvt Ltd., and M/s. Tata Capital Ltd., on the
ground that the assesse failed to deduct TDS u/s.194C of the Act.
P a g e 3 | 6
ITA No. 315/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 13 :
On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing
Officer.
Before me, ld A.R. of the assesse has filed Annexure-A to
Form No.26A issued by the Chartered Accountant to contend that
the interest paid by the assesse was shown by M/s. SREI
Equipments Finance Pvt Ltd., in the return of income filed and
contended that no disallowance was warranted under section
40(a)(ia) of the Act.
Ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities.
I have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of
lower authorities and materials available on record. In the instant
case, the Assessing Officer disallowed interest payment of
Rs.4,36,006/- paid to M/s. SREI Equipments Finance Pvt Ltd., and
M/s. Tata Capital Ltd., for non-deduction of TDS u/s.194C of the Act
by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, which was
confirmed in appeal by the CIT(A).
Before me, ld A.R. has filed Annexure-A to Form No.26A
issued by the Chartered Accountant to contend that interest income
paid by the assesse has been shown as income by M/s. SREI
Equipments Finance Pvt Ltd., and, therefore, no disallowance of
interest income was warranted. I find that total disallowance of
P a g e 4 | 6
ITA No. 315/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 13 :
interest made by the Assessing Officer was Rs.4,36,006/-. The
assesse has filed Form 26A of Rs.3,99,765/- contending that
interest paid by the assesse was shown as income by M/s. SREI
Equipments Finance Pvt Ltd. This document was not filed before
the CIT(A). Therefore, I set aside orders of lower authorities on
this part of the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for
verification and thereafter to readjudicate the same as per law.
With regard to the balance amount of Rs.36,241/-, the
assesse has not filed any evidence nor made any arguments as to
why the disallowance should be deleted. Hence, I confirm the
disallowance of Rs.36,241/-
In the result, appeal of the assesse is partly allowed for
statistical purposes…
Order pronounced on 22 /11/2018.
Sd/- (N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ranchi; Dated 22/11/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS
P a g e 5 | 6
ITA No. 315/R an/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 12- 13 :
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : New Punjab Motor Transport, Room No.28, Dimna Road, Mango, Jamshedpur
The Respondent. ITO, Ward-1(2), Jamshedpur 3. The CIT(A)- Jamshedpur 4. Pr.CIT- Jamshedpur 5. DR, ITAT, Ranchi 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order Sr. Pvt.secretary, ITAT, Ranchi on tour
P a g e 6 | 6