VALJI DUNGERSHI GALA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 17(3)-5, MUMBAI

The only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in “On the facts, and in circumstances of the case, and in law, learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) erred in upholding action of the Assessing Officer in treating computer printers not as "computers" for the purpose of claiming depreciation but as part of the ordinary machines carrying depreciation rate of 15% and disallowing depreciation of RS. 2,189,033 as against claimed @ 60% as eligible depreciation on computers in terms of Appendix I to the Income-tax Rules 1962.”

Brief facts are that the assessee is engaged in the business of DTP, color laser, Digital printing on glass paper and outdoor printing. The Assessing Officer in the course of assessment proceedings noted that the assessee has claimed depreciation at the rate of 60% on printers and he required the assessee to explain as to why the claim not be restricted at 15% by treating the printers as ordinary machines. The assessee explained that the computer printers are in the category of computers eligible for depreciation at the rate of 60% in term of Appendix-1 to the Income Tax Rules 1962. But the Assessing Officer restricted the claim of depreciation on computer printers at the rate of 15% and disallowed the

At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee filed copy of Tribunal’s order in assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2012-13 & 2013-14 in & 4553/Mum/2018 order dated 03.09.2009, wherein Tribunal following the decision of Hon'ble Madras High court allowed the claim of assessee by observing in Para 4 as under: - “4. Upon careful consideration, I find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by a catena of decisions from Hon'ble High Courts. In these decisions, it was held that computer peripherals like printers are part of the computer system and hence entitled for depreciation at the rate of 60%. In this regard I may refer to the following decision:-

Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Cactus Imaging India Pvt. ltd (TC No.921 & 922 of 2008 order dated 16.04.2018)

Respectfully following the above precedent, I set aside the orders of the