Additional depreciation claim allowed despite omission in return, with bona fide mistake not defeating eligibility.

Additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) was allowed where the assessee was otherwise eligible, even though the claim had been omitted from the return. The omission was treated as a bona fide mistake and did not, by itself, defeat the allowance. The plant and machinery had been used for less than 180 days, so only part-year depreciation was otherwise admissible, but the additional depreciation claim was still accepted. The disallowance was deleted and full relief was granted on the depreciation issue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, where the claim was omitted from the return and the plant and machinery had been used for less than 180 days.

Analysis: The assessee had claimed depreciation at 15% on new plant and machinery used for less than 180 days, whereas only 7.5% was allowable for the period of use. The omission to claim additional depreciation was found to be a bona fide mistake, and there was no ineligibility attached to the claim. In this setting, the provision for depreciation was treated as admissible despite the omission in the return.

Conclusion: The assessee's claim for additional depreciation was accepted and the disallowance was deleted.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the assessee obtained full relief on the depreciation issue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee is otherwise eligible, additional depreciation under section 32(1)(iia) may be allowed notwithstanding its omission in the return, and a bona fide mistake in the depreciation claim does not by itself defeat the allowance.

---