2014 (6) TMI 668

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....behalf of the assessee, it was submitted by the ld. Authorized Representative (AR), the assessee's counsel, that penalty stands confirmed by the first appellate authority on five grounds. However, qua two of them, i.e., depreciation on leased assets and disallowance u/s. 14A, the Tribunal has since deleted the disallowance in the quantum proceedings, while restoring the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer (A.O.) on the other two grounds, i.e., the disallowance of higher depreciation on UPS and that on incremental commission, confirming the disallowance on only one ground, i.e., the treatment of the renovation expenditure and architect's fees, aggregating to Rs.92.38 lacs, as capital expenditure and, thus, eligible to depreciati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(d)(ii) agitates the disallowance of higher depreciation on UPS. The assessee claimed depreciation on UPS at 60%, treating it as a part of the computer system, while the same was treated as an electrical equipment, subject to depreciation at 15%, by the Revenue. The tribunal vide para 57 of its order for A.Y. 2004-05 (in ITA No.405/Mum/2008 dated 31.07.2012/copy on record), following its decision for A.Y. 2003-04 (in ITA No.2846/Mum/2007 dated 31.07.2012), has restored the matter back to the file of the A.O. In this view of the matter; the quantum order having been set aside, penalty on this issue would stand to be necessarily set aside. The Revenue shall, however, be at liberty to levy penalty on this ground, where deemed fit and proper, i....