2013 (6) TMI 829

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,270/-. The assessment was completed on total income of Rs. 112,85,33,870/-, inter alia, making following additions:- 1. Disallowance of Rs. 2 lakhs on account of non-verifiability of various expenses incurred by assessee. 2. Disallowance of Rs. 3,04,397/- on account of difference in rate of depreciation of computer peripherals allowed by Assessing Officer @15% as against 60% claimed by the assessee. 3. Disallowance of Rs. 12,04,205/- on account of difference in rate of depreciation allowed by Assessing Officer @ 15% as against of 60% claimed by the assessee in regard to computer software. 3. Ld. CIT(A) deleted all the aforementioned three disallowances. 4. Being aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the department is in app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as made. The assessee company had itself declared taxable income of Rs. 1,12,61,88,270/- and, therefore, a meager disallowance of Rs. 2 lakhs, without any basis, was wholly unwarranted. Assessing officer has not brought on record any material to justify the disallowance of Rs. 2 lakhs. The disallowance made on estimated basis cannot be sustained. Ld. CIT(A) has rightly relied on the following decisions in this regard: "i) Umacharan Shah & Bros Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC) ii) Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) iii) CIT Vs. Kulwant Rai 291 ITR 36 (Delhi High Court) by following the judgement in the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC) iv) CIT Vs. Mrs. Sunit Vachani 184 ITR 121 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Sony India Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 1178/2011 iii. CIT Vs. Datacraft India Ltd. (2010) 133 TTJ 377 iv. Expeditors International (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (2008) 13 DTR (Del.) (Trib.) 435 v. Haworth (India) (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2011) 11 taxmann.com 76 (Delhi) vi. Carlton Overseas (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2011) 14 taxmann.com 97 (Delhi) vii. ACIT Vs. Chrys Capital Investment Advisors India Pvt. Ltd. 45 SOT 71 (Delhi) (URO)" Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of BSEC RAJDHANI POWERS Ltd.(ITA NO. 1266/2010) has held that computer accessories and peripherals such as, printers, scanners and server etc. form an integral part of the computer system as they cannot be used without the computer. Hence, same are the part of the computer system ....