ACIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI v. LEXICON FINANCE LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1139/MUM/2010 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 113919914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACL0914H
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1139/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant ACIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI
Respondent LEXICON FINANCE LTD, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-02-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 28-02-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 24-02-2011
Next Hearing Date 24-02-2011
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 11-02-2010
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH(AM) AND SHRI V.D.RAO (JM) ITA NO.1139/M/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 THE DCIT CIRCLE-2(2) M/S. LEXICON FINANCE LTD. AAYAKAR BHAVAN ROOM NO.545 124 ANDHERI UNIVERSA L INDUSTRIAL ESTATE 5 TH FLOOR M.K.ROAD MUMBAI 400 020. JP ROAD ANDHERI (W) MUMBAI 400 058. PAN : AAACL 0914 H APPELLANT RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : MRS. MALATI SHRIDHARAN ASSESSEE BY : MR. RAHUL RATHI O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM) THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORD ER DATED 1.12.2009 OF CIT(A) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. THE ONLY DI SPUTE RAISED IS REGARDING ALLOWABILITY OF DEPRECIATION ON LEASED ASSETS. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEPRECIATION OF RS.6 02 085/- ON LEASED ASSETS. THE DEPRECIATION HAD BEEN CLAIMED IN RESPECT OF ASSETS TAKEN ON LEASE IN EARL IER YEARS. THE AO FOLLOWING THE DECISION IN EARLIER YEAR DISALLOWED THE CLAIM O F DEPRECIATION. IN APPEAL CIT(A) NOTED THAT DEPRECIATION IN RESPECT OF THE SA ME ASSETS HAD ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN A.YRS.1996-97 AND 1997-9 8 VIDE ORDERS IN ITA 2 NOS.3360/M/2000 AND 1205/M/2001. CIT(A) THEREFORE F OLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AGGR IEVED BY WHICH THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES PERUSED THE RECOR DS AND CONSIDERED THE MATTER CAREFULLY. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE DEPR ECIATION IN THIS YEAR HAD BEEN CLAIMED IN RESPECT OF ASSETS TAKEN ON LEASE IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND THAT IN RESPECT OF THE SAME ASSETS CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION H AS ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 1996-97 AND 1997-98 BY THE TRIBUNA L (SUPRA). THE AO DID NOT ALLOW THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION ON THE GROUND T HAT APPEAL HAD BEEN FILED AGAINST THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL. IN OUR VIEW THIS IS NO GROUND FOR NOT FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE TRIBUNAL DECISION HAS TO BE FOLLOWED UNLESS REVERSED BY THE HIGH COURT. WE THEREFORE SEE NO INF IRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WHO HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE FOLLOWING THE DECI SION OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS ACCORDINGLY UPHELD. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. 5. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.02.2011. SD/- SD/- ( V.D. RAO ) (RAJENDRA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE : 28.02.2011 AT :MUMBAI COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) MUMBAI CONCERNED 4. THE CIT MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED 3 5. THE DR G BENCH ITAT MUMBAI // TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI ALK