Appellate Tribunal allows lower depreciation rate for regular buses, not intended for hired-out use.

The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the Department, allowing depreciation on motor buses owned by the assessee at a lower rate of 33 1/3% instead of the claimed 50%. The Tribunal held that the higher rate was intended for buses completely hired out, not for regular buses on fixed routes. The decision aimed to incentivize transport operators engaged in hiring out vehicles, not ordinary bus owners. The ruling reversed the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) decision, reinstating the Income Tax Officer's directive for depreciation at the lower rate.

---

---

Issues:
- Depreciation allowance on motor buses belonging to the assessee

Analysis:
The Department filed an appeal against the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) regarding the allowance of depreciation on motor buses owned by the assessee. The key contention was whether the buses were used for hire, affecting the rate of depreciation applicable. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) allowed depreciation at 33 1/3% instead of 50% claimed by the assessee, as he believed the buses were not run on hire. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) referred to the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957, and defined "stage carriage" and "hire" to conclude that the buses were indeed plying on hire, hence eligible for 50% depreciation.

The Department argued that the buses were not hired out as they operated on usual routes and generated income only when passengers boarded. On the other hand, the assessee's counsel referred to various legal dictionaries to define "hire" as compensation for the use of a thing or services. The counsel contended that since passengers paid for the journey, the buses were used in a business of hiring. The counsel also highlighted provisions of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1957, supporting the argument for higher depreciation.

The Appellate Tribunal examined the definitions of "hire" from legal dictionaries and the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. While tempted to agree with the assessee's argument, the Tribunal noted the specific language in the Income-tax Rules regarding depreciation rates for motor buses used in a business of running on hire. The Tribunal concluded that the higher rate of depreciation was intended for buses completely hired out, not for regular buses on fixed routes. The decision emphasized that the intention was to incentivize transport operators engaged in hiring out vehicles, not ordinary bus owners. Therefore, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Department, allowing depreciation at the lower rate of 33 1/3% instead of 50%.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal held that the buses owned by the assessee were eligible for depreciation at the lower rate of 33 1/3% and not the higher rate of 50%. The decision reversed the ruling of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and reinstated that of the Income Tax Officer, directing depreciation allowance at the lower rate. The departmental appeal was allowed, affirming the decision.

---