TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 1574
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e are that the original assessment was completed on 30/11/2011 determining total loss at Rs. 15,17,46,440/-. Subsequently, on perusal of the records, the AO noticed that the assessee had deducted an amount of Rs. 72,91,851/ - in the computation of income on account of additional depreciation u/ s. 32(iia) (2007-08). The AO further observed that this deduction was not in order as the additional depreciation u/ s. 32(iia) is allowable only in the year in which the asset was put to use and by allowing the same has resulted under assessment to the extent of Rs. 72,91,851/- leading to potential short levy of tax of Rs. 22,53,181/-. Hence, the AO issued a rectification notice u/ s. 154 to the assessee asking it to show cause as to why the ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....smo Films Ltd. (113 ITR 340) (Delhi Trib) and ACIT vs. SIL Investment Ltd. in ITA 0.2431/Del/2010 and submitted that there was no mistake in allowing additional depreciation u/s. 32(iia). However, this submission of the assessee was not accepted by the AO. On verification of the record, the AO noticed that the assessee has claimed additional depreciation @ 10% in AY 2008-09 on the actual cost of asset acquired and the balance additional depreciation @ 10% in the subsequent assessment year i.e. AY 2009-10. As the additional depreciation u/ s. 32(iia) is allowable only in the year in which the asset was put to use, the AO did not find appellant's claim in order and hence, the additional depreciation already allowed of Rs. 72,91,851/- was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s than 180 days in year one than the allowable additional depreciation is restricted to 50% in the first year and balance 50% additional depreciation is allowable in subsequent year. There is no restriction vis-avis the number of assessment years over which the additional depreciation is to be allowed. 6. The issue under consideration is also squarely covered by the order of coordinate bench in the case of SIL Investment Ltd., 73 DTR 0233, wherein it was held that additional depreciation, which was restricted in the year of purchase to the extent of 50% on the plea of machinery having been put to use for a period of less than 180 days, the balance of additional depreciation is required to be allowed in the succeeding year. In view of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng income of the assessee had proceeded in violation of any statutory provision. If subsequently in a case law, the coordinate bench of the Tribunal has given a finding that such receipt is a capital receipt that cannot be form the basis to reopen/readjudicate the issue which has already attained finality. The assessee has neither agitated this issue on merits during the assessment proceedings nor by way of appeal before the CIT(A). Even the same cannot be considered as a mistake apparent on record u/s.154 proceedings, as the AO had assessed the income as offered by the assessee and while doing so he had not directly violated any statutory provision of the Act. Hence, it cannot be said to be any mistake apparent on record with regard t....