Route permit value may be separated from bus cost for depreciation; tribunal cannot enhance liability without departmental appeal.

An appellate tribunal cannot enhance the assessee's liability or increase the route-value component in the absence of a departmental appeal, although such an error may be corrected through rectification. For depreciation purposes, the purchase price of a bus with a route permit cannot be treated as the value of the vehicle alone, because part of the consideration may properly be attributed to the commercial advantage attached to the route or permit. Depreciation is therefore allowable only on the balance attributable to the vehicle itself. The departmental allocation of part of the consideration to route value, and depreciation on the remaining amount, was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal was entitled to enhance the value attributable to route rights in the absence of any departmental appeal, and whether the purchase price of buses could be treated wholly as vehicle cost for depreciation purposes.

Analysis: The Tribunal had no jurisdiction to increase the route-value component from the figure accepted by the departmental authorities when there was no appeal by the Revenue. That error was, however, subsequently rectified by the Tribunal itself under its rectification power. On the merits, the purchase price of a bus with a route permit cannot be treated as representing the value of the vehicles alone. Though the Motor Vehicles Act does not in terms prohibit consideration for transfer of a permit, the commercial value of a bus depends materially on the route attached to it, and part of the price may properly be attributed to that route advantage rather than to the vehicle itself.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was not justified in enhancing the route value to the higher figure, but the rectification removed that error. The departmental allocation of part of the consideration to route value and allowance of depreciation only on the balance was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered against the assessee and the departmental assessment basis was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a departmental appeal, an appellate tribunal cannot enhance the assessee's liability, but in valuing an asset for depreciation, the consideration attributable to the associated route or permit advantage may be separated from the cost of the vehicle itself.

---