THE ACIT-2(1), UJJAIN vs. LATE SHRI MANOHARLAL KHATRI L/H KOMAL KHATRI, UJJAIN

आदेश /O R D E R

PER SHRI C.M. GARG, JM

This appeal has been filed by the revenue against the order of

the learned CIT(A), Ujjain, dated 21.12.2016 in First Appeal No. U-

241/2010-11 for the assessment year 2005-06.

ACIT vs. Manoharlal Khatri ITA No. 203/Ind/2017 2. The only issue involved in this appeal is that the

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in deleting

the addition of Rs.70,315/- on account of depreciation ignoring the

fact that allowable depreciation on dumper, loader and power

machine etc as per the fact of the case was @ 25% as against claim

of 40%.

u/s 143(3) of the Act at an income of Rs.7,14,489/- and

agricultural income of Rs. 30,000/-. Thereafter on finding that the

assessee has claimed higher rate of depreciation by showing them

being utilised for hire business for rental income whereas on

perusal of the details it was observed by the Assessing Officer that

the assessee has utilised these machines for his business, only JCB

machine was given on rent against which an income of Rs.

5,58,162/- has been shown. The Assessing Officer was, therefore, of

the view only JCB machine can be treated as commercial vehicle on

which depreciation @ 40% is allowable. He further found that the

assessee has made wrong claim of depreciation % 40% on dumper,

loader and power machine instead of 25%. In response to the

notice, the assessee submitted that these machines have been used 2

ACIT vs. Manoharlal Khatri ITA No. 203/Ind/2017 in the business of the assessee and had also been hired to outsiders

during the idle time. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept

the submission of the assessee and restricted the depreciation to

25% on these machines. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income

Tax (Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee against which the

revenue is in appeal before us.

has strongly supported the assessment order.

submitted that since the copy of rent account with full details of

rent received by cheque on hiring of the said machines has been

filed before the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income

Tax (Appeals) and the books of accounts are duly audited, the

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was fully justified in

allowing the claim of the assessee.

perusal of material available on the record of the Tribunal as also

the written submissions of the assessee, it becomes crystal clear

that the copy of rent account with full details of rent received by

cheque on hiring of the said assets has been filed before the 3

ACIT vs. Manoharlal Khatri ITA No. 203/Ind/2017 authorities below by the assessee in respect of dumper, loader,

paver machine, etc. and as such the Commissioner of Income Tax

(Appeals) has rightly allowed the claim of depreciation of the

assessee. We, therefore, confirm the order of the Commissioner of

Income Tax (Appeals) and dismiss this appeal of the revenue.

The order has been pronounced in open Court on 05th May,

2017.

Sd/- sd/- लेखा सद�य �या�यक सद�य (O.P.Meena) (C.M. Garg) Accountant Member Judicial Member

May 5 , 2017.

Dn/