The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, has recently, in an appeal filed before it, on failure of the department to submit a contradict view to the CIT(A)’s decision, confirmed the deletion of addition of depreciation expenses on crates.
The aforesaid observation was made by the Delhi ITAT, when appeals were filed before it by the assessee as well as the revenue, as against the order of the CIT(A), New Delhi, for the AY 2013-14.
The ground of the Revenue’s appeal being that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by way of disallowance out of depreciation expenses claimed on account of crates, even when in the case of assessee itself the issue of allowance of rate of depreciation on crates went up to the High court for A.Y 2009-10 and the High Court vide order had set aside the issue back to the file ITAT for fresh examination, Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth , the CIT DR, supported the assessment order and submitted that AO was quite correct and justified in making disallowance of Rs. 1,60,36,627/- on account of excess depreciation claim on crates by including in block ‘bottles and shell’.
The DR further submitted that the CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee without any basis, and therefore that, the impugned first appellate order may kindly be set aside by restoring that of the AO.
However, on the other hand, Sh. Deepak Chopra and Ms. Priya Tandon, the assessee’s
ARs, by submitting the copy of the order of ITAT E Bench dated 09.05.2018 in ITA No. 174/Del/2016 for AY 2011-12, thereby submitted that identical issue was raised by the revenue before the Tribunal and that the ground of revenue was dismissed by the Tribunal by holding that since the assessee had been allowed depreciation at 100%, the claim of assessee at 50% on such plastic crates is quite justified.
The authorised representatives of assessee added that on being asked by the bench, the DR did not controvert that the Tribunal has granted relief to the assessee by dismissing appeal of revenue and upholding the order of the CIT(A) wherein, the disallowance of depreciation was thus deleted by the CIT(A).
Hearing the opposing contentions of both sides and thereby perusing the materials available on record, the coram of B. R. R Kumar, the Accountant Member and C.M Garg, the Judicial Member held:
“On careful reading of Tribunal order in assessee’s own case for AY 2011-12 we note that the ld CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO on account of claim of depreciation. The revenue carried the matter before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee was allowed by the Tribunal.”
“The ld DR could not show us any different and distinguish facts and circumstances pertaining to present AY 2013-14 from 2011-12 on the issue of claim of depreciation of the assessee which could lead us to take different view as has been taken by the Tribunal in AY 2011-12. Therefore, respectfully following the order of the Tribunal order dated 09.05.2018 for AY 2011-12, we hold that the ground of the revenue for AY 2013-14 are devoid of merits and therefore we dismiss the same”, the ITAT coram thus concluded.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
