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>Appeal allowed for 2012-13, dismissed for 2011-12. Tribunal upholds disallowance of 50% depreciation on factory building.</h1> <h3>M/s. Sophia Automotive Private Limited Versus The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 6 (3), Chennai 34.</h3> M/s. Sophia Automotive Private Limited Versus The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 6 (3), Chennai 34. - TMI Issues:1. Delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) for assessment year 2012-13.2. Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act for assessment year 2011-12.3. Disallowance of 50% depreciation on factory building.Issue 1: Delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A) for assessment year 2012-13:The appeal was dismissed due to a delay of 44 days in filing, with the authorized person for signing Form 35 being out of the country. The ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay as basic details were not provided. The Tribunal directed the assessee to submit complete details for condonation of delay and directed the ld. CIT(A) to consider the details and decide the case on merits.Issue 2: Reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act for assessment year 2011-12:The assessment was reopened within the time limit provided by the statute, and the ground raised by the assessee challenging the jurisdiction for reopening was dismissed for lack of merit. The Tribunal found the reopening process to be in compliance with the law.Issue 3: Disallowance of 50% depreciation on factory building:The Assessing Officer disallowed 50% of the depreciation claim as only 50% of the factory building was used by the assessee, with the rest let out to other parties. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, stating that rental income from letting out the building should be treated as 'Income from House Property' and not under other sources. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the rental income categorized as 'Income from House Property' renders the assessee ineligible for claiming depreciation on the let-out portion of the factory building.In conclusion, the appeal for assessment year 2012-13 was allowed for statistical purposes, with directions to submit details for condonation of delay. The appeal for assessment year 2011-12 challenging the reopening of assessment was dismissed. The disallowance of 50% depreciation on the factory building was upheld by the Tribunal, emphasizing that rental income categorized as 'Income from House Property' precludes the assessee from claiming depreciation on the let-out portion.
TaxTMI 