Tribunal allows deductions under Section 80IA and depreciation on intangible assets

The tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, following Supreme Court and Delhi High Court precedents, allowing deductions under Section 80IA for Inland Container Depots/Container Freight Stations and depreciation on intangible assets. The tribunal directed the AO to verify details for advance lease rent and determine its allowability. Additionally, the tribunal upheld the deletion of additions for Rail System (Rolling Stock), depreciation on retired assets, and assets not registered in the assessee's name, dismissing the revenue's appeal.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Disallowance of Rs. 72,39,67,477/- under Section 80IA for Inland Container Depots (ICDs)/Container Freight Stations (CFS).
2. Disallowance of Rs. 9,55,200/- on account of depreciation on intangible assets (license from Indian Railways).
3. Disallowance of Rs. 2,62,74,970/- for advance lease rent paid on long-term lease land.
4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 415,71,30,892/- under Section 80IA for Rail System (Rolling Stock).
5. Deletion of addition of Rs. 3,30,015/- for depreciation on assets retired from active use.
6. Deletion of addition of Rs. 2,92,769/- for depreciation on assets not registered in the name of the assessee.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Rs. 72,39,67,477/- under Section 80IA for Inland Container Depots (ICDs)/Container Freight Stations (CFS):

The tribunal noted that this issue is covered by the Supreme Court's decision in CIT vs. Container Corporation of India Ltd. (2018) 404 ITR 297 (SC). The Supreme Court held that ICDs function similarly to ports and facilitate export and import processes. The court clarified that ICDs are considered "Inland Ports" under Section 80IA, and the benefit of deduction under this section is applicable. The tribunal also referenced the Delhi High Court's decision in the assessee's case for earlier assessment years, which upheld the deduction. Respectfully following these precedents, the tribunal deleted the addition confirmed by the CIT(A).

2. Disallowance of Rs. 9,55,200/- on account of depreciation on intangible assets (license from Indian Railways):

The tribunal referred to its decision for the assessment year 2010-11 in the assessee's own case, where it was held that the non-refundable registration fee paid to Indian Railways for running container trains constitutes a commercial right. This right, being an intangible asset, is eligible for depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. The tribunal cited the Delhi High Court's decision in Areva T&D India Ltd. vs. DCIT, which supported the view that such intangible assets are eligible for depreciation. Following these precedents, the tribunal allowed the depreciation claim.

3. Disallowance of Rs. 2,62,74,970/- for advance lease rent paid on long-term lease land:

The tribunal noted that this issue was covered by its decision for the assessment year 2010-11 in the assessee's own case. The tribunal had set aside the issue to the AO to verify whether the claim was for depreciation or expenditure. The tribunal directed the AO to verify the details and determine the allowability of the claim as per law. Following this precedent, the tribunal set aside the issue to the AO with similar directions.

4. Deletion of addition of Rs. 415,71,30,892/- under Section 80IA for Rail System (Rolling Stock):

The tribunal referred to the Delhi High Court's decision in the assessee's own case, which upheld the exemption under Section 80IA for rolling stock. The court noted that the ITAT had relied on its previous ruling, which was in favor of the assessee. The tribunal, following the High Court's decision, upheld the CIT(A)'s order deleting the addition.

5. Deletion of addition of Rs. 3,30,015/- for depreciation on assets retired from active use:

The tribunal referred to the Delhi High Court's decision, which found that the assessee had paid for the assets, obtained possession, and used them for business purposes. The determination was factual, and no question of law arose. Following this decision, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order deleting the addition.

6. Deletion of addition of Rs. 2,92,769/- for depreciation on assets not registered in the name of the assessee:

The tribunal noted that the Delhi High Court had addressed this issue, finding that the assessee had paid for the assets and used them for business purposes. The court held that the determination was factual and no question of law arose. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order deleting the addition.

Conclusion:

The tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes and dismissed the revenue's appeal, following the precedents set by the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court in the assessee's own case. The tribunal directed the AO to verify the details for the claim of depreciation on advance lease rent and determine its allowability as per law.

---