Court rules depreciation based on actual sale price, not fair market value. Income-tax Act provisions support decision.

The High Court upheld the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal's decision, determining that depreciation should be calculated based on the actual sale price of an asset, not the fair market value. The Court found that the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act supported this interpretation, distinguishing between asset sales and scrap sales. The decision favored the assessee, concluding that the reduction of fair market value from the block while calculating depreciation was not justified. The appeal was resolved in favor of the assessee, with no costs awarded.

---

---

Issues:
Calculation of depreciation based on fair market value vs. actual sale price of an asset.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the calculation of depreciation on a flat sold by the assessee. The Departmental Valuation Officer determined the fair market value of the flat at Rs. 66,44,902, while the flat was sold by the assessee for Rs. 9,00,000. The Assessing Officer initially reduced the fair market value from the block while calculating depreciation. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that this reduction was not justified.

Upon further appeal, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal. The Tribunal's decision was based on the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, specifically section 43(6)(c)(i)(B) and Explanation 4 to section 43(6). The Tribunal noted that the expression "moneys payable" in relation to the sale of an asset refers to the actual sale price and not the fair market value.

The Tribunal highlighted the distinction between the treatment of asset sales and scrap sales under section 43(6)(c)(i)(B). It emphasized that for asset sales, the written down value of the block of assets should be reduced by the actual sale price, while for scrap sales, the fair market value of the scrap should be considered. The Tribunal's interpretation aligned with the legislative intent behind the relevant provisions.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the interpretation adopted was in accordance with the law. The question of law raised in the appeal was answered in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs.

---