2021 (1) TMI 1119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 2. With the consent of both the parties, delay of 62 and 19 days; appeal wise; respectively in filing the appeals stated to attributable to communication gap is condoned in the larger interest of justice. These two cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 3. The assessee's identical solitary substantive grievance raised in these two appeals challenges correctness of both the lower authorities' action disallowing its depreciation claim amounting to Rs. 6,08,23,278/- and Rs. 137,66,31,766/-, assessment year wise; respectively in the course of assessment and upheld in the CIT(A)'s lower appellate order(s) under challenge. 3.1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gly supported both the lower authorities' action in disallowing the assessee's claim of depreciation. He sought to buttress the point that assessee can neither be held as owner of the concerned road project nor has it acquired any commercial or business rights for its exclusive usage so as to claim depreciation. His next argument is that the hon'ble Bombay high court in North Karnataka Expressways Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 145 (Bom.) has made it clear that an assessee who has executed such a BOT agreement with NHAI cannot be held as owner of the corresponding asset entitling it to claim depreciation. Mr. Sai's vehement contention accordingly is that the Tribunal's Special Bench decision may require re-consideration in view of all these le....