Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

WhatsAppJoin Channel
Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID: 109879
Like 0Bookmark

Earth Moving Machines (like JCB) treated as Asset or Vehicle

Date 15 Feb 2016
Replies8 Replies
Views 28345 Views
Classification of earth-moving machinery as plant and machinery for depreciation when used in industry, not as motor vehicle.
Earth-moving machinery such as JCBs used in industrial operations are to be treated as Plant and Machinery (assets) rather than as motor vehicles, so depreciation and accounting treatment follow asset classification; functional use for lifting within a plant does not alter this identity, and statutory guidance (Motor Vehicles Act exclusions, non-registration as heavy motor vehicles) and tax practice distinguish earth-moving machinery from motor vehicles. (AI Summary)

Dear All,

Greeting of the day..Kindly clarify my doubt..earth moving machine - JCB treated as vehicle or asset in a manufacturing unit.

Regards

M.RamKumar

8 answers
Sort by

Old Query - New Comments are closed.

Hide
Like 0
Replied on Feb 15, 2016
1.

Sir,

You have not elaborated nor specified the reason of your query.

However, the functioning and operation of a JCB machine cannot be equated either with a motor lorry or a motor truck.

The JCB machine invariably falls within the scope of a particular type of machinery for the sole purpose of excavation of soil/earth which comes under the purview of 'Plant and Machinery' (Assets) and so the applicable rate of depreciation in respect of JCB machines shall accordingly be based on its being 'Plant and Machinery' (Assets) and not based on it being as a Vehicle; as seems to be your indirect query.

In view of above, you are therefore eligible to claim lesser amount of depreciation under the category of Assets rather than under Vehicles.

Like 0
Replied on Feb 15, 2016
2.

Dear Sir,

Thank you for quick reply. I am working in a power plant and we also have Kraft paper manufacturing unit. We are using a JCB in for both plants. like lifting of raw material and coal etc...

Hope my doubt is clear.

Regards

M.RamKumar

Like 0
Replied on Feb 15, 2016
3.

Sir,

The definition of `motor vehicle' from the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MV Act) as per the MV Act is as follows:

"Motor vehicle or vehicle means any mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads...; but does not include ... .a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises... "

Further, Earth moving machinery is primarily used in the infrastructure sector. It is also a fact that the JCB Earth Movers are not been registered as heavy motor vehicles (like Mobile Cranes) with the Regional Transport Authorities.

.T he Income-Tax Act also had made a distinction between earth moving machinery and motor vehicles.

Hence, the fact that in your case that JCB is also being used for lifting of raw material and coal etc. shall not changed its identity.

Therefore, there is no change in the views expressed in my above reply, as the legal position on the issue is already settled.

Like 0
Replied on Feb 16, 2016
4.

In my view also JCB will not come under the definition of ''vehicle' and therefore it is to be considered as Plant and Machinery.

Like 0
Replied on Feb 16, 2016
5.

I am thankful to both experts, Sh.Mahir S and SH. MARIAPPAN GOVINDARAJAN, Sir. Really your views have enriched my knowledge.Concept is clear to me know.

Like 0
Replied on Feb 16, 2016
6.

Dear Mathurthi Ramkumar

You may find this judgment useful

2010 (12) TMI 913 - ITAT, Bangalore Magtron Earth Movers Versus ITO

Like 0
Replied on Feb 16, 2016
7.

Thanks M.Govindarajanji and K. Sethiji for the endorsement and appreciation of my views.

Like 0
Replied on Feb 17, 2016
8.

Thanks to M/S.YAGAY AND SUN for providing case law in support of the contention of the experts. It is really useful.

Old Query - New Comments are closed.

Hide
Recent Issues