2022 (5) TMI 1066

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lant/assessee filed his return of income on 31.10.2006, declaring the total income of Rs.3,30,35,780/-, which was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). Later on, with regard to allowance of additional depreciation claimed on windmill, the assessment was reopened by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act on 07.12.2009. After hearing the appellant and upon perusal of the materials, the assessing officer passed the assessment order on 30.12.2010, disallowing the claim for additional depreciation of Rs.60,59,600/- made by the appellant under section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. Challenging the order of assessment, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant. But, the said claim was disallowed in the reassessment order dated 30.12.2010. On appeal by the appellant, the appellate authority allowed the said claim, following the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision dated 12.12.2008 in ITA Nos.325 & 1763/Mds/2007, which was also affirmed by the High Court; and the Special Leave Petition preferred by the department has not been admitted. The findings of the appellate authority is quoted below for ready reference: "4. I have gone through the submissions filed by the appellant's Authorised Representative as well as the assessment order. For the purpose of claiming additional depreciation entitled for manufacture or production of new item u/s.32(1)(iia), the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the said claim, on the premise that the appellant who is not engaged in the business of manufacture or production of any article or thing, is not entitled for additional depreciation as per the provisions of section 32(1)(iia) of the Act. Therefore, this appeal by the appellant / assessee. 7.It is to be pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for both sides that the issue involved herein is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by a co-ordinate bench of this court in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichy Vs. M/s.Atlas Export Enterprise (Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.121 & 122 of 2015) dated 17.03.2015 and the relevant paragraphs of the said judgment is usefully extracted below: "5. In the decision reported in [2010] 321 ITR....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). We, therefore, do not find any question of law much less substantial question of law to entertain these appeals. These appeals fail and the same are dismissed. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2009 is also dismissed." 6. The facts in the present case are no different from the above said decision. In the present case, the core business of the assessee is manufacturing and export of textile goods. During the assessment year 2006-07, the assessee had entered into the business of generation of power and installed one wind mill. The assessee maintained separate books of accounts for export division and the wind mill division. Since the assessee has treated the windmill division as separate busin....