2019 (6) TMI 1625

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2014-15 and 2015-2016. 2. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant in ITA No. 344/Chny/2019 for assessment year 2014-15 are stated herein. 4. The Revenue raised the following grounds of appeal: 1 ''The order of the ld. CIT(A) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case. 2 The ld. CIT(A) erred in giving relief to the assessee by treating the impugned receipt in question as interest free loan and allowing the depreciation claim against assets acquired from the said receipt despite the Tamil Nadu Government G.O. dated 18.07.2005 classifying it as Grant. 3 The ld. CIT(A) erred in gi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the Act. It was submitted before the Assessing Officer that though the amount was released as grant and latter it was treated as loan in terms of G.O. Ms.No.22, Highways and Minor Ports (HMI) Department, dated 03.02.2016, thus it was pleaded before the Assessing Officer that Explanation 10 to Section 43(1) of the Act cannot be invoked. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before the ld.CIT(A) who vide impugned order allowed the claim taking into consideration the AG report treating the said amount as grant subsequent in terms of G.O. (Ms) No.22, dated 03.02.2016, allowed the appeal. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 8. We heard the rival submissions a....