2014 (1) TMI 746 - AT - Income Tax

ITAT ruling: Assessee wins on interest, loses on depreciation claim. Legal interpretations key.

The ITAT partly allowed the assessee's appeal and dismissed the Revenue's appeal. The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee by deleting the addition of ... Addition on account of notional interest on security deposit – Held that:- Following Advacado Properties & Trading (I) Pvt. Ltd. [2011 (2) TMI 1299 - ITAT MUMBAI] - the addition on account of notional interest on security deposit for computing the annual value of the property – Decided in favour of Assessee. Disallowance on account of claim of depreciation – Held that:- Following Allied Electronics and Magnetics Ltd. V. DCIT [2007 (2) TMI 213 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - depreciation cannot be granted for the plant and machinery which has not been actually used in the business of the assessee – One of the conditions for allowing deduction u/s 32, is that the machinery must have been used for the purposes of the business during the previous year in which the machinery is sold, discarded, demolished or destroyed – Decided against Assessee. Disallowance of interest expenditure – Held that:- Following M/s Marchon Textiles Industries P. Ltd [2014 (1) TMI 384 - ITAT MUMBAI] - the claim of the assessee allowed by noting that non- utilisation of interest bearing funds for giving interest free advances cannot be the basis for such disallowance – Decided against Revenue. Issues:1. Addition of notional interest on security deposit2. Disallowance of depreciation claim3. Disallowance of interest expenditureIssue 1: Addition of Notional Interest on Security DepositThe assessee and Revenue filed cross appeals against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) for the assessment year 2007-08. The first ground of the assessee's appeal concerned the addition of Rs.13,09,827/- on account of notional interest on security deposit. The AO calculated notional interest on interest-free security deposits taken by the assessee from tenants and added it to the income from house property. The Ld.CIT(A) upheld the addition. However, the assessee argued that a similar issue was decided in their favor by the ITAT for the assessment years 2005-06 & 2006-07. The ITAT, relying on previous decisions, including a Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court, deleted the addition of notional interest. Consequently, the ITAT allowed ground no. 1 of the assessee's appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee.Issue 2: Disallowance of Depreciation ClaimThe second ground of the assessee's appeal related to the disallowance of Rs.2,82,935/- on account of the claim of depreciation on Plant & Machinery. The AO disallowed the claim as there was no Plant & Machinery as per the balance sheet schedule, noting the change in the nature of the business. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance. The ITAT, considering similar facts in the assessee's case and relying on previous decisions, dismissed this ground of the assessee's appeal, upholding the disallowance of the depreciation claim.Issue 3: Disallowance of Interest ExpenditureThe Revenue's appeal focused on the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.47.43 lakhs made by the AO, which was later deleted by the Ld.CIT(A). The AO disallowed the interest, suspecting the genuineness of the arrangement. However, the Ld.CIT(A) accepted the evidence provided by the assessee regarding commercial considerations for making investments. The ITAT noted that in previous appeals for the AY's 2005-06 & 2006-07, similar issues were decided in favor of the assessee. Therefore, the ITAT dismissed the grounds of the Revenue's appeal, ruling in favor of the assessee.In conclusion, the ITAT partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, based on the detailed analysis and legal interpretations provided for each issue involved in the judgment.