2008 (1) TMI 441 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Confirms Unabsorbed Depreciation Set-Off Against House Property Income for Assessment Year 2003-04.

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision that unabsorbed depreciation from the assessment year 1999-2000 should be ... Setting off the unabsorbed depreciation relating to earlier years against income from house property - Whether the unabsorbed depreciation relating to AY 1999-2000 is to be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of section 32(2) as applicable to assessment year 1999-2000 - HELD THAT:- It is well-settled that the law applicable to any assessment is the law that prevails as on the first day of April of the relevant assessment year and as held in the case of CIT v. Craigmore Plantations India Ltd.[2001 (6) TMI 19 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], it is the duty of the AO to apply the law as it stood on the first April of the relevant assessment year. In the present case, the assessment year involved is 2003-04 and therefore, the provisions of section 32(2) as existed in the statute as on 1-4-2003 would be applicable to decide the treatment to be given to unabsorbed depreciation while allowing the same to be set off against the income for assessment year 2003-04. In the present context, the facts involved are different inasmuch as the amendment made in section 32(2) with effect from 1-4-2002 restoring the position as it existed prior to 1-4-1997 is apparently beneficial to the assessees and the same does not seem to have caused any hardship to the assessees in general and therefore, the question of giving any benefit to the assessee in accordance with the pre-amended provisions of section 32(2) which are not applicable to the year under consideration cannot arise. Thus, we are, therefore, of the view that the issue relating to setting off the unabsorbed depreciation against the income for the year under consideration i.e., assessment year 2003-04 is required to be considered and decided in accordance with the provisions of section 32(2) as amended with effect from 1-4-2002 by the Finance Act, 2001 which are applicable to that year. In that view of the matter, we uphold the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss ground No. 1 of the assessee's appeal. The issues raised in ground No. 2 relating to charging of interest under section 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D are merely consequential in nature - dismissing ground No. 1 on merits, this ground of the assessee is therefore dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Issues Involved:1. Adjustment of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation for assessment year 1999-2000 against income from house property.2. Charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Adjustment of Unabsorbed DepreciationThe primary issue revolves around whether the unabsorbed depreciation from the assessment year 1999-2000 should be set off against income from house property for the assessment year 2003-04. The assessee, a public limited company engaged in manufacturing and selling auto components, filed a return declaring a total income of Rs. 22,03,740. The assessee adjusted carried forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation against business income, leaving income from house property untouched.The Assessing Officer (AO) observed that sufficient unabsorbed depreciation from 1999-2000 was available and set it off against the income from house property, resulting in a nil income. The AO's decision was based on the amended provisions of section 32(2) effective from 1-4-2002, which allowed unabsorbed depreciation to be set off against income under any head.The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, stating that the provisions of section 32(2) applicable for the assessment year 2003-04 should be considered, which allowed such set-off.The Tribunal reviewed the provisions of section 32(2) as they stood before 1-4-1997, between 1-4-1997 and 31-3-2002, and after 1-4-2002. It noted that prior to 1-4-1997, unabsorbed depreciation was treated as current year's depreciation and allowed to be set off against any income. The amendment from 1-4-1997 restricted this benefit, limiting the set-off to business income and capping the carry-forward period to eight years. The amendment from 1-4-2002 restored the pre-1997 position.The Tribunal emphasized that the applicable law for any assessment year is the law as it stands on the first day of April of that year. Therefore, for the assessment year 2003-04, the provisions as on 1-4-2003 applied, which allowed the unabsorbed depreciation to be set off against any income.The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's reliance on the decisions in Southern Travels and Keshwa Enterprises (P.) Ltd., noting that those cases involved different assessment years and contexts. It concluded that the unabsorbed depreciation for 1999-2000 should be set off against income from house property for 2003-04, as per the provisions applicable from 1-4-2002.Issue 2: Charging of Interest Under Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234DThe second issue regarding the charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D was deemed consequential. Both parties agreed that the resolution of this issue depended on the outcome of the primary issue. Given that the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision on the primary issue, this ground was also dismissed.ConclusionThe appeal of the assessee was dismissed. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that the unabsorbed depreciation for the assessment year 1999-2000 should be set off against income from house property for the assessment year 2003-04, in accordance with the provisions of section 32(2) as applicable from 1-4-2002. The issue of charging interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D was dismissed as consequential.