Tribunal allows additional depreciation for drying and threshing tobacco

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the claimed additional depreciation of Rs. 5,93,23,320. It held that the activity of drying and threshing tobacco constituted manufacturing, aligning with section 32(iia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision was supported by legal precedents, including a judgment from the Madras High Court, which deemed the conversion of raw tobacco into a different commodity through processing as manufacturing activity. The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, affirming the eligibility of the assessee for the additional depreciation.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disallowance of additional depreciation by Assessing Officer.
2. Whether the activity of drying and threshing tobacco amounts to manufacturing for claiming depreciation.

Issue 1: Disallowance of Additional Depreciation
The Assessing Officer disallowed the additional depreciation claimed by the assessee, amounting to Rs. 5,93,23,320, on the grounds that the activity of re-drying and threshing tobacco did not constitute manufacturing. The Assessing Officer observed that the raw material and end product were both tobacco, with no new or distinct object produced. Consequently, the claim for depreciation was disallowed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Issue 2: Manufacturing Activity for Depreciation Claim
The dispute revolved around whether the activity of drying and threshing tobacco could be considered as manufacturing, thereby making the assessee eligible for additional depreciation under section 32(iia) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ruled in favor of the assessee, citing the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Premier Tobacco Packers Pvt. Ltd. The High Court held that the conversion of raw tobacco into a different commodity through processing constituted manufacturing activity, entitling the assessee to special deductions.

Tribunal's Decision
The Tribunal, comprising Hon'ble Members V. Durga Rao and D.S. Sunder Singh, analyzed the arguments presented by both parties. The Tribunal noted that a coordinate bench had previously ruled in favor of allowing depreciation claimed by an assessee engaging in similar activities. Citing the precedent set by the Madras High Court, the Tribunal concluded that the activity of drying and threshing tobacco amounted to manufacturing, aligning with the provisions of section 32(iia) of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the additional depreciation claimed by the assessee. The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed, upholding the decision in favor of the assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment upheld the eligibility of the assessee for additional depreciation based on the manufacturing nature of the activity of drying and threshing tobacco, as established by legal precedents and in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

---