During preceding assessment year, the assessee bought some assets on which it was eligible for additional depreciation. However, it claimed only 50 per cent of additional depreciation in the preceding assessment year because assets were put to use in second half of the year. Accordingly, the balance additional depreciation was claimed by the assessee in succeeding assessment year, i.e., instant assessment year. The AO denied the claim of assessee and made addition accordingly. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO.
On appeal, the Tribunal held in favour of assessee as under:
1) There is no such restriction that balance of one time incentive in the form of additional sum of depreciation shall not be available in the subsequent year; and
2) The assessee is entitled to the benefit of additional depreciation as soon as he purchases the new eligible assets.
Therefore, the unclaimed additional depreciation in the preceeding year was allowed in instant assessment year - DCIT v. COSMO FILMS LTD. [2012] 24 taxmann.com 189 (Delhi - Trib.)
|
Tuesday, 28 August 2012
Additional depreciation is statutory allowance, can't be limited to 50% by condition of usage of asset for 180 days
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
GAAR Not Applicable to Genuine Capital Market Transactions: Telangana High Court
In a significant ruling, the Telangana High Court held that General Anti-Avoidance Rules (GAAR) cannot be invoked merely because a transacti...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
-
Facts Centrica India Offshore Private Limited (CIO), an Indian Company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Centrica Plc, UK Centrica Plc a...
-
A new website launched for TDS related matters www.tdscpc.gov.in TRACES – T DS R econciliation A nalysis and C orrection E nabling S yste...
-
The Tax Audit season has started and it’s the time when the Assessees rush to their Chartered Accountants (CA) to get their Tax Audit d...
-
SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd vs. ITSC (Delhi High Court) The assessee entered into a scheme of arrangement u/s 391-394 of the Compani...
-
Facts The taxpayer, a partnership firm, derived income from the business of handling and transport of ship containers, customs clearing a...
-
M/s. Alpha Projects Society P. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) In AY 2005-06, the assessee made payments to contractors & for professi...
-
01. TDS u/s 194J is required to be done for Royalty also w.e.f 13-7-2006. 02. Royalty had been defined under explanation 2 of se...
-
F.No.354/66/2011-TRU Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs...
-
M/s. Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam Special Bench) The assessee incurred brokerage expenses of Rs.38....
No comments:
Post a Comment