Assessee
installed certain computers in its factory premises and claimed depreciation
available on computers i.e. @ 60%. AO restricted claim of depreciation to 20% after
holding that such computers should be treated either as office appliances
failing which they would form part of plant and machinery and in either case,
depreciation shall be available at 20%. CIT(A) allowed depreciation on such
computers @ 60%. On Revenue’s appeal, ITAT, while deciding the issue in
assessee’s favour, held that it cannot be said as a universal proposition of
law that computers are always used only in offices and not in manufacturing
activities. On further appeal, Hon’ble High Court held that had AO shown that
computers formed part of integrated manufacturing process, his stand that the
same would form part of plant and machinery might have had some basis. In the
given case, no such material was there on record. It was not as if computers cannot
be installed for direct use in manufacturing activity and thereby forming part
of machinery used in such activity. There may be number of ways in which
installation of a computer may enhance and improve the efficiency. Also there
was nothing on record to suggest that computers were part of plant and
machinery. Hence, it was held that decision of CIT(A) and ITAT treating the
same as simplicitor computers and granting de[recitation at the rate prescribed
under the law calls for no interference. Resultantly, Revenue’s appeal was
dismissed.
[CIT
Vs. Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd. – Tax Appeal No.942 of 2013]
No comments:
Post a Comment