2014 (5) TMI 433 - AT - Income Tax

Tax Appeal Success: Depreciation Method Change Valid, AO Overstepped Authority

The appeal challenged the re-opening of assessment under section 148 without a cogent reason and the application of section 115JB for determining book ... Determination of book profit u/s 115JB of the Act – Minimum alternate tax (MAT) - changed the method of depreciation from straight line method to written down value method - Held that:- The assessee has changed the method of depreciation from straight line method to written down value method - Deprecation has been calculated in accordance with the new method from the date of assets coming into use - depreciation for the current year was higher and profit was lower by the same amount – Relying upon Kinetic Motor Co. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax [2003 (1) TMI 47 - BOMBAY High Court] - under the Companies Act both the straight line method and written down value method are recognized - once the amount of depreciation actually debited to the profit and loss account was certified by the auditor, it was not permissible for the AO to make book adjustment - depreciation actually debited to the profit and loss account was certified by the auditors - it is not permissible for the AO to make book adjustments – the AO is directed to delete the addition on account of adjustments made u/s 115JB of the Act – Decided in favour of Assessee. Issues involved:1. Re-opening of assessment under section 148 without cogent reason.2. Application of section 115JB for determining book profit.3. Justification of making adjustments under section 115JB.Issue 1: Re-opening of assessment under section 148 without cogent reason.The appeal was directed against the order of the CIT(A)-5, Mumbai, pertaining to A.Y. 2003-04. The assessee challenged the re-opening of the assessment under section 148 without providing a cogent reason. The counsel for the assessee did not press ground no.1, and it was subsequently dismissed.Issue 2: Application of section 115JB for determining book profit.The grievance in ground nos. 2 & 3 related to the determination of book profit for section 115JB purposes. The AO re-opened the assessment as the assessee claimed higher depreciation, leading to the escape of book profit taxable under section 115JB. The AO computed the adjustment under section 115JB at Rs.1,21,61,961, which the CIT(A) upheld. The counsel for the assessee argued that the change in depreciation method was valid under the Companies Act and the AO lacked power to make adjustments beyond section 115JB provisions. The Tribunal noted that the change in depreciation method was permissible under the Companies Act, citing relevant case law. Consequently, the AO was directed to delete the addition made under section 115JB.Issue 3: Justification of making adjustments under section 115JB.The Tribunal analyzed the audited statement of accounts and confirmed that the depreciation method change was in accordance with the Companies Act. Relying on the decision in the case of Kinetic Motors Co. Ltd. and the Supreme Court's ruling in Apollo Tyres Ltd., the Tribunal held that once depreciation was certified by auditors, the AO could not make book adjustments. Therefore, the AO was directed to delete the addition made under section 115JB. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed, and the order was pronounced in open court on April 30, 2014.This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues raised in the appeal comprehensively, outlining the arguments presented by both parties and the Tribunal's reasoning leading to the final decision.