2021 (12) TMI 366 - HC - Income Tax

Court Upholds Decision on Depreciation for School Buses

The Court upheld the authorities' decision to reject the appellant's claim for additional depreciation for school buses, emphasizing that the primary ... Entitlement for additional depreciation on hiring buses - assessee is a Trust registered u/s 12A - assessee claimed additional depreciation for the school buses operated by the assessee provided for the above additional service - only argument canvassed is that the receipts received by the assessee in this behalf are included in the business income and, therefore, the assessee is automatically entitled to additional rate of depreciation - HELD THAT:- The judgment of the Supreme Court in Gupta Global Exim P. Ltd [2008 (5) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] is a complete answer to the said contention canvassed by the assessee. Gupta Global Exim P. Ltd held that the user of vehicles in the business of the assessee is the test and that the receipt/income is included in the business income would not i.e., qualify for additional depreciation. Except the above, no other point is urged. In our view the point urged is no more res integra and the test laid down by the Supreme Court in Gupta Global Exim P. Ltd is clear on the point. By appreciating the circumstances and also following the judgment in Gupta Global Exim P. Ltd the questions are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Issues:1. Entitlement to additional depreciation for hiring buses.2. Interpretation of relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act.3. Application of precedents in determining eligibility for additional depreciation.Issue 1: Entitlement to Additional Depreciation for Hiring BusesThe appellant, a Trust running a school, claimed additional depreciation for school buses used to transport students and teachers. The claim was rejected by the authorities, including the Tribunal, stating that the appellant was not engaged in any business of running buses on hire. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant's primary activity was charitable education, not a business. The Tribunal cited relevant provisions specifying higher depreciation rates for vehicles used in a business of running them on hire. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant did not qualify for enhanced depreciation under these provisions. The appellant argued that since it earned business income, it was entitled to additional depreciation. However, the Court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Gupta Global Exim P. Ltd, emphasizing that the crucial factor for additional depreciation eligibility is the use of vehicles in the business of transportation, not merely inclusion of income in the business category.Issue 2: Interpretation of Relevant Provisions of the Income Tax ActThe appellant contended that being subjected to business income automatically entitled them to claim additional depreciation. However, the respondent argued that the nature of activity and purpose of vehicle use were essential for determining entitlement to additional depreciation. The respondent highlighted that the consideration received by the appellant from students and teachers was reimbursement, not a business transaction. The Court analyzed the judgments cited by both parties, emphasizing the importance of vehicles being used for the business purpose of the assessee to qualify for additional depreciation. The Court reiterated that the mere inclusion of income in the business category does not guarantee eligibility for enhanced depreciation, as clarified in the judgment of Gupta Global Exim P. Ltd.Issue 3: Application of Precedents in Determining Eligibility for Additional DepreciationThe Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the test laid down by the Supreme Court in Gupta Global Exim P. Ltd was clear on the point of eligibility for additional depreciation. The Court reiterated that the user of vehicles in the business of the assessee is the determining factor for additional depreciation eligibility, not merely the inclusion of income in the business category. By following the precedent set by the Supreme Court, the Court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, highlighting that the primary consideration for additional depreciation entitlement is the use of vehicles in the business of the assessee.In conclusion, the Court upheld the decision of the authorities to reject the appellant's claim for additional depreciation, emphasizing the importance of the actual business use of vehicles in determining eligibility for enhanced depreciation rates under the Income Tax Act.