TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 1835
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal falls in a narrow compass. The same being whether crawler cranes/trailers are in the nature of plant & machinery and thus eligible for depreciation @ 15% as per the Assessing Officer (AO) or these are motor vehicles entitled for depreciation @ 30% as per the assessee. 3. Briefly stated, the facts are that the AO disallowed the claim of depreciation by the assessee u/s 32 of the Act on crawler cranes/trailers @ 30% as motor lorries used in the business of running them on hire and in its place granted depreciation @ 15% by holding it to be assets in the nature of plant & machinery. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A), following the order of the ITAT 'E' Bench, Mumbai held that the assessee is entitled for claim of higher depreciation @ 30% on c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....made by the ld.AO that such fees are some sort of entry tax is factually in-correct. The copes of RTO tax paid receipts for crawler cranes to operate in Gujarat are at pg nos. 12 to 18 of paper book. A certificate from Govt. Approved RTO consultant, M/s.Sama Auto Consultant explaining the nature of tax paid appears at pg. No. 19 of paper book. It is thus the case that under the Bombay Vehicle Tax Act, 1958, the crawler cranes owned by the appellant are recognised as heavy motor vehicles. 13. The ld. AO in the Asstt. Order has further discussed the type of work carried out by cranes and arrived at the conclusion that cranes unless registered under the Motor Vehicle Act could not be termed as "Motor Lorry" entitled for depreciation @ 30%. In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Dismissal of appeal for A.Y.1998- 99. (iii) Shethia Erectors & Materials Handlers Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 7254/Mum/97, Hon. Members, "A" Bench, ITAT Mumbai dated 08.01.2001. (iv) DCIT Vs. Mitesh L. Shethia, ITA No. 2638/Mum/1999, Hon. Members "SMC-IV" Bench ITAT, Mumbai dated 14.02.2001 (The issue of crawler crane is covered here). (v) Crown Hiring Vs. ITO, ITA No. 3799/Bom/1991, Hon. Members, "C" Bench ITAT, Mumbai dated 09.02.1998. (vi) Gujco Carriers Vs. CIT, 256 ITR 0050 Gujarat (2002) (vii) Sanco Trans Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 61 ITD 0317 Madras (1997) (That crawler crane is a vehicle and not plant & machinery is decided). (viii)CIT Vs. Galord Constructions, 190 Taxman 0406 (Kerala)(2010) (ix) Sanghvi Movers (P) Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 110 ITD 001 (Pune) (200....