GODREJ & BOYCE MFG CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1253/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 August 2018AY 2013-143 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue of disallowance of depreciation on assets acquired on demerger had been consistently decided against the assessee by coordinate benches in its own cases for preceding assessment years. The Tribunal also upheld the disallowance under Section 14A, as admitted by the assessee's counsel, citing a Supreme Court decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed depreciation on assets acquired on demerger. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, and the assessee appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether depreciation on assets acquired on demerger is allowable. Whether disallowance under Section 14A is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ravish Sood(JM)

For Appellant: Ms. Sonalee Godbole
For Respondent: Shri Nishant Somaiya
Hearing: 21.8.2018Pronounced: 21.8.2018

O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :-

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 9.12.2016 passed by the learned CIT(A)-22, Mumbai and it relates to A.Y. 2013-14.

2.

At the time of hearing learned Counsel appearing for the assessee did not press ground Nos. 5 to 8 and hence they are dismissed as not pressed.

3.

Ground No. 1 is general in nature and does not require adjudication.

4. Ground No. 2&3 relates to disallowance of depreciation claimed by the assessee.

5.

Learned AR fairly submitted that this issue has been decided against the assessee by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in the order dated 5.4.2017 passed in relating to A.Y. 2011-12.

2 Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

6.

We have heard learned DR on this issue. We noticed that an identical issue has been considered by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case and the same has been decided against the assessee with following observation :-

4.

The learned AR fairly submitted that the issue has been decided against the assessee by the ITAT while deciding assessee's appeals for A.Ys. 2003-04 to 2010-11 in three separate orders. The learned DR agreed with the aforesaid submissions of the assessee.

5. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material on record. As could be seen, the issue relating to disallowance of assesee's claim of depreciation on assets acquired on demerger of Godrej Appliance Ltd. is arising from A.Ys. 2003-04 onwards and the matter has travelled upto ITAT. In three separate orders i.e. & Ors dated 31.12.2014 (for A Y 2003-04); ITA 4540/Mum/2011 & Ors for AY 2005-06 dated 13.04.2016 and ITA 8488/Mum/2011 (for AY 2008-09) dated 23.08.2016, the Tribunal has upheld the order of the departmental authorities in disallowing assessee's claim of depreciation on assets acquired on demerger. Respectfully, following the consistent view of the Tribunal in assesse's own case for the preceding assessment years, we uphold the decision of the CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the ground raised by the assessee.

7.

Consistent with the view taken by the Coordinate Bench, we uphold the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue.

8.

Ground No. 4 relates to disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Act. The Learned AR fairly admitted that this issue has been decided against the assessee by Hon'ble Supreme Court in assessee’s own case reported in 394 ITR 449. Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned CIT(A) on this issue.

3 Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

9.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order has been pronounced in the Court on 21.8.2018.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →