2020 (11) TMI 1015 - HC - Income Tax

Court allows higher depreciation rate for LPG transport vehicles

Usha Johnson Proprietrix, M/s. Global Roadways, (Now Known As Maruthayath Transports) Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax Aayakar Bhavan, Thiruvananthapuram

Usha Johnson Proprietrix, M/s. Global Roadways, (Now Known As Maruthayath Transports) Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax Aayakar Bhavan, ... Issues:Claiming higher depreciation rate on vehicles used for transporting LPG cylinders under a contract.Analysis:The appeals were filed challenging the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal related to assessments for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The main legal issue was whether the assessee could claim depreciation on vehicles supplied to Indian Oil Corp. Ltd. and Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. at a rate of 30% instead of 15%. The assessee argued that as the nature of the business involved hiring vehicles, depreciation at the higher rate of 30% should be allowed. On the other hand, the Department contended that the nature of the business was a 'transport contract business,' thus allowing depreciation only at 15%. The Assessing Officer found that the assessee had claimed depreciation at 40%, leading to a revision by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal initially dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds but was later remitted by the High Court for a decision on merits. Ultimately, the Tribunal rejected the claim of the assessee, leading to the current appeal.During the proceedings, the counsel for the appellant referred to Circular No.652 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, clarifying that higher depreciation would be admissible for vehicles used in the business of transportation of goods on hire. The circular left no room for doubt that the assessee would be entitled to claim depreciation at the rate of 30%, regardless of whether the business was running vehicles on hire or a transport contract business. Citing a Supreme Court decision, the counsel argued that the test for claiming higher depreciation was the use of vehicles in the transportation business. In this case, the appellant was facilitating transportation by supplying vehicles under contract for LPG cylinder transport, indicating eligibility for the higher depreciation rate. The counsel also highlighted a Bombay High Court decision supporting the applicability of a higher rate of depreciation to motor lorries used in transportation business.The Court, considering the law, circular, and Supreme Court precedent, concluded that the orders issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the Tribunal could not be sustained. The original order of the Assessing Authority allowing depreciation at 30% was restored. The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the Income Tax Appeals and directing each party to bear their respective costs.