Mwh India P. Ltd, Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax

अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Asghar Zain-Sr. AR ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Niraj Sheth

सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख / Date of Hearing: 12/01/2015 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of 12/01/2015 Pronouncement :

आदे श / O R D E R

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue

against the order of the ld CIT(A) dated 23/11/2009. The Revenue

has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the depreciation of 2 ITA No.923/M/2010

Rs.11,35,024/- charged is included in the book depreciation of Rs.49,42,706/-. The ld. CIT(A) also ignored the finding of AO that the depreciation charged in assessment year 2003-04 was for Rs.48,80, 576/- and this year Rs.49,42,706/-. If the amount charged @100% of Rs.11,35,024/- is included in depreciation, in addition to normal depreciation, as per Company Act on brought forward WDV the depreciation chargeable to the accounts would have been much more than Rs.49,42,706/- which is shown in the schedule of fixed assets. The assessee has not substantiated the fact with any working or with any documents."

2. At the outset the ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that

the ld. CIT(A) has allowed the impugned depreciation as per

provisions of the Income tax Act. Merely because the depreciation

shown in the books of account for the immediately preceding

assessment year 2003-04 was shown @ 100% as per Company's

Act that itself cannot be a ground to deny the eligible claim of

depreciation to the assessee as per provisions of income tax Act. It

is not a case where the assessee has claimed depreciation in the

preceding year @ 100% in the income tax return. Depreciation

claimed in books under Companies Act does not affect

computation made under Income tax Act.

2.1 The ld. DR has also agreed on this point that the

depreciation in this case has been allowed by CIT(A) as per

provisions of Income tax Act. In view of the above stated position 3 ITA No.923/M/2010

we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A). There is

no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is dismissed.

3. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12/01/2015. आदे श कȧ धोषणा खुले Ûयायालय मɅ Ǒदनांकः 12/01/2015 को कȧ गई ।

Sd/- Sd/- (B.R. BASKARAN) (SANJAY GARG ) लेखा सदःय / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ûयाियक सदःय/JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; Ǒदनांक Dated 12/ 01/2015 व.िन.स./ Jv , Sr. PS

आदे श कȧ ूितिलǒप अमेǒषत/Copy षत of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant 2. ू×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुƠ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आयुƠ / CIT

5. ǒवभागीय ूितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai

6. गाड[ फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानुसार/ ार BY ORDER, स×याǒपत ूित //True Copy// उप/सहायक उप सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अिधकरण मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai.