TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Decision on Windmill Depreciation and Personal Expenses Disallowance</h1> <h3>Chand Fruit Company Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 2, Sangli</h3> Chand Fruit Company Pvt. Ltd. Versus The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 2, Sangli - TMI Issues:1. Disallowance of depreciation on windmill foundation and installation.2. Disallowance of expenses on alleged personal use.Issue 1: Disallowance of Depreciation on Windmill Foundation and Installation:The appeal concerns the disallowance of depreciation amounting to Rs. 10,12,043 on the cost of foundation and installation of a wind turbine. The assessee claimed accelerated depreciation at 80% for the entire windmill project, while the Assessing Officer contended that normal rates of 10% for civil work and 15% for installation were applicable. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, leading the matter to the Tribunal. The Tribunal referred to a recent decision where it was held that expenses on civil work and commissioning, integral to windmills' operational functioning, are eligible for the same depreciation rate as windmills. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the claimed depreciation. The decision was supported by precedents emphasizing the functional test for incidental expenditures related to power generation. Consequently, Ground Nos. 1 & 2 were allowed.Issue 2: Disallowance of Expenses on Alleged Personal Use:The second issue pertains to the disallowance of Rs. 1,03,815 for personal use elements in vehicle repairs, maintenance, telephone, and travel expenses. The assessee argued that as a company, personal use could not be inferred from expenses. The Tribunal agreed, noting that a company, as a juristic person, cannot have personal use, and any personal usage by directors should be taxed as a perquisite. Therefore, estimating disallowance for personal use was deemed unnecessary. Consequently, Ground No. 3 was also allowed.In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the claimed depreciation on windmill foundation and installation while rejecting the disallowance of expenses on alleged personal use. The decision was based on the functional test for incidental expenditures related to power generation and the distinction between company and individual usage.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
