Income Tax Officer 8(2)(3),R.No. 213,Aayakar Bhavan,M.K. Road,Mumbai 400 020. VS. Nutech Corporate Services P. Ltd.,(Formerly known as IIT Capital Services Ltd.,) Rajabahadur Mansion,2nd Floor,28, B.S. Marg,Mumbai 400 001.
July, 07th 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCHES "B" MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI B.R. MITTAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 2769/Mum/2009
Assessment Year 2005-06
Income Tax Officer 8(2)(3), Nutech Corporate Services
R.No. 213, P. Ltd.,
Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly known as IIT
M.K. Road, Vs. Capital Services Ltd.,)
Mumbai 400 020. Rajabahadur Mansion,
28, B.S. Marg,
Mumbai 400 001.
PAN: AAACI 3356 A
(Appellant ) (Respondent)
Revenue by : Shri P.K.B. Menon
Assessee by : NONE
Date of hearing : 28-06-2012
Date of pronouncement : 04-07-2012
PER RAJENDRA, A.M.
Following Grounds of Appeal were filed by the Appellant against
the order dated 03-02-2009 of the CIT(A)-VIII, Mumbai:
"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law,
the learned CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of depreciation of
Rs.64,15,914/- on leasing of assets claimed by the assessee
without appreciating the facts of the case.
2 ITA No. 2769/Mum/2009
Nutech Corporate Services P. Ltd.,
The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above
ground to be set aside and that of the ITO/AC/DCJT be restored.
The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any grounds or add
a new ground which may be necessary."
2. On 28-06-2012, when case was called for hearing nobody
appeared on behalf of the respondent company. DR relying upon the
order of the Assessing Officer (AO) submitted that depreciation allowed
by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) was not as per the provisions of
3. During the assessment proceedings AO found that the assessee
company had earned income from leasing, hire purchase, merchant
banking and other financial activities and the lease rentals reflected in
the P&L Account related to assets purchased and leased out in the
earlier years. He asked the assessee to explain as to why the claim for
depreciation should not be disallowed. After considering the reply of
the assessee,he disallowed the assessee's claim for depreciation on
leased assets amounting to Rs. 64,15,9141/-, on the basis of findings
in the past.
4. Assessee preferred an appeal before the FAA. After considering
the orders of his predecessor for earlier period he restored the matter
to the file of the AO observing as under :
"Since there is no change in the facts of the case and the legal
position, I have no reason to differ from the decision of my
predecessor. Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances, the
Assessing Officer is directed to re compute the claim of depreciation
by following the direction given above in the appellate order for A.Y
1999-2000. This ground is adjudicated accordingly."
5. From the above order of the FAA it is clear that FAA had not
`allowed the claim of depreciation on leasing of assets claimed by the
assessee'as mentioned in Ground No.1 of the appeal memo. As the
ground is not arising out of the order of the FAA, we dismiss the
3 ITA No. 2769/Mum/2009
Nutech Corporate Services P. Ltd.,
appeal filed by the AO. He will be free to file fresh appeal, if he desires
to do so.
Appeal filed by the AO stands rejected.
Order pronounced in the open court on 4th July, 2012
(B.R. MITTAL) (RAJENDRA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Date 4th July, 2012
3. The concerned CIT (A)
4. The concerned CIT
5. DR "B" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai
6. Guard File
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Mumbai Benches, Mumbai