Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment year [AY in short] 2012-13 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai [in short CIT(A) ] dated 31/05/2019 which has invalidated the reassessment proceedings as initiated by Ld. AO for the year under consideration.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“D” BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND
HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
(Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode)
Assessment Year: 2012-13)
5th Floor, 571, Aaykar Bhawan
M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020
PAN No. : AABCG-4831-B
M/s Morries Energy Limited
11-A, Embassy Apartments
46, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-36
Assessee by : Ms. Poonam Agnihotri – Ld. AR
Revenue by : Shri Rajendra Joshi– Ld. Sr. DR
Date of Hearing : 25/05/2021
Date of Pronouncement : 01/06/2021
O R D E R
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment year [AY in short] 2012-13 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai [in short CIT(A) ] dated 31/05/2019 which has invalidated the reassessment proceedings as initiated by Ld. AO for the year under consideration.
2. After hearing rival arguments, our adjudication to the subject matter of appeal would be as given in succeeding paragraphs.
3.1 The material facts are that the assessee being resident corporate assessee stated to be engaged in power generation, real estate, securities etc. was subjected to reassessment proceedings for the year under consideration and an assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 15/12/2017. The return of income was already scrutinized u/s 143(3) vide order dated 28/03/2015. However, the case was reopened vide notice u/s 148 dated 31/03/2017. The reason to trigger reassessment was that the assessee claimed depreciation of 100% on windmill having capacity of 1.25 mw which was so eligible only if the windmill was put to use for more than 180 days during the relevant previous year. Since the windmill was put to use for less than 180 days, the assessee was not eligible to claim the depreciation and accordingly, there was excess depreciation claim for Rs.125.69 Lacs.
3.2 The assessee while opposing the reassessment proceedings, submitted that the windmill was out to use for more than 180 days and the claim was rightly made and allowed. This aspect was already examined by Ld. AO during scrutiny assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) and the claim was allowed with due application of mind. However, rejecting the same and after appreciating assessee’s documentary evidences, Ld.AO opined that the assessee was entitled to 50% rate of depreciation only on these assets. Accordingly, the assessed loss was reduced with the alleged excess claim.
4. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee assailed reassessment proceedings by submitting that requisite details, as well as documentary evidence, etc. with respect to depreciation claim, were duly submitted during the course of original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3). The same was duly verified and accepted by Ld. AO with due application of mind.
To know more in details find the attachment file