2014 (5) TMI 507

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat there is no production or manufacturing of fertilizer's. 2. The Ld CIT(A) has erred in facts in coming to view that building and other assets were not used for business purposes. The buildings and other assets were used by the employees engaged in the closure operations of the company and will now be used for the revival of the company as approved by the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) of Government of India. 3. The reliance placed on judgment of Mumbai Bench of ITAT in the case of M/s Rishi Roop Polymers (P) Ltd. by the Ld. DCIT, Circle-12(1), New, in the assessment order is erroneous. 4. The appellant craves the consent to add, modify, amend or delete any of the ground of appeal at the time of hearing." 2. Bri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 6,366/- (e) Intangible Assets @ 25% Rs. 4,880/- Rs. 40,43,612/- Thus the appellant company has not claimed the depreciation on plant and machinery required for manufacturing fertilizers and the total depreciation claimed by the assessee is less than that added back by the Ld DCIT. (ii) Sir, Ld. DCIT has mentioned in the assessment order that since the assessee has not undertaken any manufacturing activities in any of its units, therefore it is not eligible for depreciation claimed by it. This is most arbitrary and against the Law. As per section 32(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the depreciation "in respect of depreciation of - (i) Building, machinery, plant or furniture, being tangible assets; (ii) Know-how, patents, copyr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be used. Without these the work of Security Guards, (180 persons), Maintenance Staff of 2 to 4 persons in each of the units), Adhoc staff, temporary labour and the office space for unit heads and accounts works in each of the above units would not have been possible. Survival and security of all the assets of the company depends upon the use of these. v. It is not the case of the Revenue that the expenses claimed by the assessee are bogus or have not been incurred on the maintenance and repair. vi. In the case law cited by the Ld AO Rishiroop Polymers (P) Ltd 286 ITR (AT) 54 order dated 8 September 2005 plant was closed due to lockout and strike for five years and Mumbai Tribunal allowed the depreciation on other assets while disallow....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....note that claim in respect of voluntary separation scheme expenses of Rs.12,87,200/- had been allowed by ld. CIT (A). Therefore, it cannot be denied that for implementing the scheme necessary infrastructure must have been maintained by assessee. Hence, merely on the ground that the company was directed to be closed down, it could not be inferred that till the time of final closure, no activities were being carried out by the assessee. 6. From the submissions of the assessee, as noted earlier, it is evident that minimal staff had to be kept for proper survival and security of all the assets of the company. The assessee company being a juristic entity incorporated under the Companies Act, did not cease to exist, merely on passing of the or....