TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court allows 20% additional depreciation for thermal power electricity generation</h1> <h3>Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Kolkata Versus M/s. Damodar Valley Corporation</h3> Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-3, Kolkata Versus M/s. Damodar Valley Corporation - TMI Issues:1. Entitlement to additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act.2. Validity of initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.Analysis:Issue 1: Entitlement to Additional DepreciationThe primary issue in this case revolves around the entitlement of the respondent, engaged in generating electricity from thermal power, to claim additional depreciation at a rate of 20% under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act. The Court considered the core question of whether electricity, as a movable property capable of transmission and transfer, qualifies for additional depreciation. The Court cited the precedent set by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Andhra Pradesh vs. National Thermal Power Corporation case, establishing electricity as movable property. Relying on various decisions, including the Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata-I vs. Ankit Metal and Power Limited, the Court concluded that the respondent is indeed entitled to claim additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. The judgment dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue, affirming the entitlement of the respondent to the additional depreciation.Issue 2: Validity of Section 263 ProceedingsThe secondary issue pertains to the validity of the initiation of proceedings under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. However, since the Court's decision favored the respondent on the primary issue of entitlement to additional depreciation, the necessity to address the validity of the Section 263 proceedings became moot. The Court explicitly stated that as the core issue was resolved in favor of the respondent, the consideration of the Commissioner's jurisdiction under Section 263 was unnecessary. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the question regarding the validity of the Section 263 proceedings was not deliberated upon.In conclusion, the judgment by the High Court of Calcutta, delivered by Hon'ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Hon'ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, upheld the entitlement of the respondent to claim additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iia) of the Income Tax Act, thereby dismissing the revenue's appeal. The Court's decision rendered the consideration of the validity of Section 263 proceedings redundant, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without further deliberation on the secondary issue.
TaxTMI 