M/S.BABY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL LTD,KOZHIKKODE vs. THE ACIT,CIRCLE-1(1), KOZHIKKODE

We notes with the able assistance coming from the Revenue’s side that the assessee has raised its three substantive grounds, inter alia, challenging the depreciation disallowance of Rs.16,06,999/- on hospital equipment, depreciation disallowance of Rs. 19,12,976/- pertaining to the alleged luxury vehicle(s) used by Baby Memorial Hospital Ltd. Directors, etc. and medicine purchase of Rs.51,47,453/-; respectively. A perusal of the case file indicates as per last para in page 13, ground 8 of the lower appellate discussion that the foregoing depreciation disallowance amounting to Rs. 19,12,976/- already stands deleted. This substantive ground is rejected accordingly.

We are now left with assessee’s first the third substantive grounds regarding disallowance of depreciation on medical equipments and medicine purchases, etc. (supra).

Learned Sr. D.R. vehemently argued that both the lower authorities found the assessee to have put the relevant fixed assets to use on 11.04.2011, i.e., well after 31.03.2011 and that no evidence was filed regarding medicine purchases, The facts remains that there is no denial in lower authorities respective orders that prima facie that the assessee had duly recognised its receipts arising from use of relevant fixed assets in the relevant previous year. Learned Sr. D.R.’s case is that the instant clinching aspect requires the CIT(A)’s afresh appropriate adjudication so as to examine all the relevant necessary facts regarding the alleged deficiency. The same factual position continues regarding assessee’s medicine purchases as well which forms integral part of its day-to-day business activities. We accordingly restore these twin issues to the file of the CIT(A) to verify and decide the same within three effective opportunities of hearing to the assessee. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.