COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. UPASANA FINANCE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is filed under Section 260a of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Revenue, in I. T. A. No. 1141/mds/97, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras, B Bench raising the following substantial question of law.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the above question of law are as under:

(3.) WE heard the learned counsel. It was found by the Tribunal that the cost of each asset was not higher than Rs. 5,000/ -. The printing cylinders are mainly used in the printing industry and the matter to be printed are screwed on to these cylinders and then prints are taken. Therefore these printing cylinders were being used as part of the plant. The MS bins are being used as individual item and each one of them is a plant as a single unit. The same is the case for Shippers Sintex Ice Boxes, as Shippers Sintex Ice Boxes are of different capacities and are used individually as per the requirements. So, each of these assets is a plant. In the case of First Leasing Co. of India Limited Vs. C. I. T. , reported in 244 ITR 238, it is held that "each bottle was an independent unit and was not dependent for its user on the availability of other bottles whether empty or filled. The use of one bottle was not interconnected with the use of another bottles. Since each bottle was an individual unit and all bottles together did not constitute a single integrated unit, depreciation under the proviso to Section 32 (1) (ii) of the Act was allowable. " Another Division Bench of this Court had considered the above judgment and held the same view, in the case of C. I. T. Vs. Alagendran Finance Ltd reported in 264 ITR 269. So, we are of the view that depreciation of 100% on printing cylinders, MS bins and Shippers Sintex Ice Boxes are eligible under the first proviso to Section 32 (1) (ii) of the Act, and each of these assets is a plant individually.