COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAVING OFFICE AT AAYAKAR, BHAVAN PATTO, PLAZA, PANAJI - GOA Vs. AUTO MOBILE CORPORATION OF GOA LTD , HONDA, SATTARI, GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Tax Appeal filed by the Revenue through the Commissioner of Income Tax, seeks to call in question the order by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Panaji Bench on 27th January 2004 in ITA no.1113-4/PN/95.

(2.) The Assessee is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. The Assessee-Company is engaged in the business of fabrication of automobiles parts. The Assessee filed its return on 31st December 1990, declaring its total income under Section 115J of the Income Tax Act at Rs. 44,91,314/-. Another Return was filed on 17th July 1991 making some adjustment to the total income and changing the same to Rs. 45,91,314/-. The Returns were taken up for scrutiny by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act (the Act). Before the Assessing Officer, the question of depreciation arose for consideration. The Respondent-Assessee claimed that it had not claimed depreciation even though the assets were put in use during the year. The Assessing Officer disagreed with the contention of the Respondent-Assessee and held that under the Block of Assets Concept and in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Saharanpur Electrical Supply Company Ltd., vs CIT, 1992 194 ITR 294 there is no option with the Assessee not to claim depreciation and therefore disallowed the case of the Respondent-Assessee and took the depreciation into consideration. The Assessing Officer thereafter determined the total income of the Respondent-Assessee at Rs.44,91,314/- and passed an order accordingly.

(3.) The Respondent-Assessee filed an Appeal ITA No.154/PNJ/92-93 before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The main contention of the Respondent-Assessee, relevant for the purpose of the present Appeal was that the Assessee has an option whether to claim depreciation or not, and depreciation cannot be thrust upon the Assessee by the Assessing Officer suo motu. Decision of this Court in CIT vs Sri Someshwar Sahnkari Sakhar Karhana Limited, 1989 177 ITR 443 was relied upon.