Dr. Keyur Parikh,, Ahmedabad v. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2(3),, Ahmedabad

ITA 2861/AHD/2013 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 20-10-2016 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 286120514 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AFSPP5662G
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 2861/AHD/2013
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 14 day(s)
Appellant Dr. Keyur Parikh,, Ahmedabad
Respondent The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-2(3),, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 20-10-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 20-10-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 14-10-2016
Next Hearing Date 14-10-2016
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 06-12-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI S.S. GODARA JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA. NO: 2861/AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) DR. KEYUR PRIKH 381-A 17 TH LANE SATYAGRAH CHHAVNI JODHPUR TEKRA AHMEDABAD V/S DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE- 2(3) AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AFSPP5662G APPELLANT BY : MS. URVASHI SHODHAN AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JAMESH KURIAN SR. D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 14-10-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 -10-2016 PER N.K. BILLAIYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-III AHMEDABAD DATED 30.0 9.2013 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 201 0-11. ITA NO. 2861 /AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2010-11 2 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS TWOFOLD; (I) THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DISALLOWANCE O F 20% DEPRECIATION ON WRITING INSTRUMENT ON ACCOUNT OF PERSONAL USE. (II) THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO AGGRIEVED BY THE ADDITION OF RS. 2 13 790/- TREATING THE SAME AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. 3. ASSESSEE IS A DOCTOR BY PROFESSION PRACTICING AS C ARDIOLOGIST. THE RETURN FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS FILED ON 27.09.201 0 DECLARING INCOME AT RS. 1 78 91 229/-. THE RETURN WAS SELECTED FOR SCRU TINY ASSESSMENT AND ACCORDINGLY STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND SERVE D UPON THE ASSESSEE. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEPRECIATION ON WRITI NG INSTRUMENTS AT RS. 3 34 296/-. THE A.O. WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT PE RSONAL USES OF WRITING INSTRUMENTS CANNOT BE RULED OUT. HE ACCORDINGLY DIS ALLOWED 20% OF RS. 3 34 296/- AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 66 680/-. 5. ON FURTHER PROBE THE A.O. FOUND FOLLOWING EXPENSES DEBITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT:- I) GODADDAY COM KEYUR ME 10 YEAR DOMAIN REGISTRATION - RS. 9620/- II) R. KUMAR LENSES FOR EYES CATHLAB - RS. 85000/- III) GKB LENS PVT. LTD. - RS. 62500/- IV) MEPHISRTO NEWPORT SHOES CATHLAB - RS. 34678/- V) GKB LENS PVT. LTD. LENS FOR CATHLAB - RS.40106/ - TOTAL - RS.231904/- ITA NO. 2861 /AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2010-11 3 6. THE A.O. WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE AFOREMENTIONED EXPENSES ARE OF CAPITAL IN NATURE. HE ACCORDINGLY TREATED ALL THE E XPENSES AS CAPITAL IN NATURE AND ALLOWED DEPRECIATION ON THE SAME AND MAD E THE ADDITIONS ACCORDINGLY AT RS. 2 13 790/-. 7. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) B UT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. 8. BEFORE US THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE VEHEMEN TLY STATED THAT THERE IS NO CONCRETE FINDING GIVEN BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIE S WHICH COULD SUGGEST THAT SOME PERSONAL ELEMENT WAS INVOLVED IN THE USES OF WRITING INSTRUMENTS. INSOFAR AS THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE IS CONCERNED IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT CONSIDERING THE PROFESSION OF THE ASSESSEE SUCH EXPENDITURES HAVE TO BE INCURRED ON DAY TO DAY BASI S AS PER THE USAGE OF THE OPERATION THEATRE. THE LD. COUNSEL CONCLUDED BY SAYING THAT THE ACTION OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES IS AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN HAND AND THE ADDITIONS DESERVE TO BE DELETED. PER CONTRA THE LD . D.R. STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 9. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORD ERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THERE IS A VERY T HIN LINE BETWEEN THE BUSINESS USE AND PERSONAL USE. SUCH DISTINCTION CAN NOT BE MADE FOR EVERY ITEM OF EXPENDITURE. THERE HAS TO BE A STRONG BASIS FOR TREATING EXPENDITURE FOR PERSONAL USES. WRITING INSTRUMENTS ARE DEPRECIA BLE ASSETS WHOSE VALUE IS DEPLETED YEAR AFTER YEAR EVEN IF THERE IS NO CON CRETE USE. ASSUMING THAT WHILE WRITING PRESCRIPTION/ARTICLES IN MEDICAL BOOK S THE ASSESSEE MAY HAVE ITA NO. 2861 /AHD/2013 . A.Y. 2010-11 4 USED THE WRITING INSTRUMENT FOR SOME PERSONAL NOTIN GS WOULD NOT DISENTITLE HIM FROM THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION PART OF WHICH C ANNOT BE DISALLOWED FOR PERSONAL USES. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE FINDING S OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE A.O. TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 66 86 0/-. GROUND NO. 1 IS ALLOWED. 10. COMING TO THE SECOND GRIEVANCE RELATING TO THE TREA TMENT OF CERTAIN EXPENDITURE AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE WE FIND FORCE I N THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL. ONLY A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL CAN DECID E AN ITEM WHICH IS RECURRING IN NATURE AND WHICH IS OF CAPITAL IN NATU RE. THE EXPENDITURES MENTIONED ELSEWHERE CLEARLY SHOW THAT THEY RELATED WITH THE CATH LAB AND THE DETERIORATION OF THE ITEMS DEPENDS UPON THE USE S OF THE CATH LAB ON DAY TO DAY BASIS. THEREFORE THE A.O. CANNOT SIT AT THE DRIVING SEAT AND DIRECT A DOCTOR TO TREAT WHICH EXPENDITURE IS OF RE VENUE IN NATURE AND WHICH IS OF CAPITAL. WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN TH E IMPUGNED ADDITIONS. WE ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE A.O. TO TREAT THE ENTIR E EXPENDITURE OF RS. 2 31 904/- AS REVENUE IN NATURE. HOWEVER WE FIND T HAT THE A.O. HAS ALLOWED DEPRECIATION ON THE SAME. WE DIRECT THE A.O . TO WITHDRAW THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION. GROUND NO. 2 IS ALLOWED. 11. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20 - 10- 20 16. SD/- SD/- (S. S. GODARA) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: TRUE COPY