ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ASHOKA DSC KATNI BY-PASS ROAD PVT.LTD, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 212/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 December 2018AY 2013-144 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, following its own prior rulings on similar issues. The 'License to collect toll' was considered an intangible asset eligible for depreciation.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing depreciation on 'License to collect toll' as an intangible asset. The Assessing Officer had denied this depreciation. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether a 'License to collect toll' qualifies as an intangible asset for claiming depreciation under the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32(1)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

For Appellant: Shri Prashant Gudekar
Hearing: 04.12.2018Pronounced: 11.12.2018

आदेश / ORDER

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM:

The appeal filed by Revenue is against order of CIT(A)-1, Nashik, dated 23.11.2016 relating to assessment year 2013-14 against order passed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short „the Act‟).

2.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

ITA No.212/PUN/2017 2 Ashoka DSC Katni By-Pass Road Pvt. Ltd.

1.1 Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law the Ld CIT(A) has justified in allowing the depreciation @ 25% of Rs.4,90,43,230/- as claimed by the assessee on “License to collect toll”. 1.2 Whether on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law whether the Ld CIT(A) was justified in holding that assessee was eligible to claim depreciation on „License to collect Toll‟ considering it as an intangible asset in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. 2) The order of CIT(A) may be vacated and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored.

3.

Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of assessee nor any application was moved for adjournment. However, find that the issue raised in present appeal stands covered by the orders of Tribunal in earlier years, even in the statement of facts it is mentioned that the CIT(A) has relied on earlier decisions of Tribunal in the case of assessee itself relating to assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. Hence, we proceed to decide the present appeal after hearing the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue.

4.

The limited issue which is arising in the present appeal raised by Revenue against the order of CIT(A) in allowing depreciation @ 25% on “License to collect Toll”. The Assessing Officer had denied the said depreciation to the assessee. However, the CIT(A) held the assessee to be eligible to claim depreciation considering the same to be an intangible asset in terms of section 32(1)(ii) of the Act. The relevant findings of CIT(A) are in para 4.3 which read as under:- “4.3 I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the assessment order and the rival submissions. It is undisputed that the appellant has got the “Right to Collect Toll” for a specified period which is authorized by Government of Maharashtra, Public Works Division, Dist. Solapur. This “Right to Collect Toll” was considered as an asset by the appellant as the same was acquired as per the Governments order of BOT. This right of the appellant is a valuable right having commercial value. The appellant raised loans by assigning this "Right to Collect Toll" under the BOT scheme. On these facts, it can be said that the

ITA No.212/PUN/2017 3 Ashoka DSC Katni By-Pass Road Pvt. Ltd.

"Right to collect Toll" is an intangible asset covered by the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The submissions and arguments made on behalf of the appellant have merit and, therefore, are accepted. Consequently, the appellant is held to be eligible for depreciation on this asset. This view is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of sister concern of the appellant viz. Ashoka Info Pvt. Ltd. in I.T.A. No.44/PN/07 dated 31/12/2008 - Pune Bench, Ashoka Bridgeways in I.T.A. No. 686/PN/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 dated 29/04/2013 - Pune Bench, and another decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Reliance Ports and Terminals Ltd. in I.T.A. Nos.1743 to 45/MUM/07 dated 26/11/2007 - Mumbai Bench. On identical facts in the case of appellant's sister concern namely Ashoka Bridgeways in I.T.A No.NSK/CIT(A)-l/49/2014-15 dated 24/07/2015, I have held that "Right to Collect Toll" is an intangible asset, eligible for depreciation @ 25%. In view of the above findings and respectfully following the orders of the Hon'ble Tribunal (supra) on this issue and to maintain consistency in the judicial orders, therefore, it is held that the "Right to Collect Toll" is an intangible asset and the same is eligible for depreciation @ 25% as per the claim made by the appellant. The AO is directed accordingly to allow depreciation of ₹ 4,90,43,230/-. This ground of appeal is allowed…”.

5.

The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue has failed to bring to our notice any decision of the Hon‟ble High Court reversing the view of Tribunal but has pointed out that the appeal against group concern is pending before the Hon‟ble High Court. Since the issue admittedly, stands covered by the order of Tribunal and following the same parity of reasoning, we uphold the order of CIT(A). The grounds of appeal raised by Revenue are thus, dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on this 11th day of December, 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याययक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक Dated : 11th December, 2018. GCVSR

ITA No.212/PUN/2017 4 Ashoka DSC Katni By-Pass Road Pvt. Ltd.

आदेश की प्रयतलऱपप अग्रेपषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : 1. अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent; 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A)-1, Nashik; 4. The Pr.CIT-1, Nashik; ववबागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे “फी” / DR 5. ‘B’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गार्ड पाईऱ / Guard file. आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्यावऩत प्रतत //True Copy// वररष्ठ तनजी सधिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण ,ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 32(1)(ii)

All 565 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32(1)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →