Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Media Content & Communications ... vs Assessee on 30 May, 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH "B",
MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, PRESIDENT
& SHRI I.P.BANSAL (J.M)
ITA NO. 6759/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05)
M/s. Media Content & The ACIT - 6(3),
Communications Services (India) Pvt. Mumbai.
Ltd., C/o. Mahesh Patira & co., Vs.
209-A, Rizvi Chambers-1, 2nd Floor,
Hill Road, Bandra(W),
Mumbai - 400 050.
PAN:AADCM 0507A
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Jitendra Sakaria
Respondent by : Shri Jitendra Yadav
Date of hearing : 30/05/2012
Date of pronouncement : 06/06/2012
ORDER
PER I.P.BANSAL, J.M
This is an appeal filed by the assessee. It is directed against the order passed by CIT(A)-12, Mumbai dated 30/6/2010 for the assessment year 2004-05. The only issue raised by the assesee in this appeal is regarding rate of deprecation on UPS.
2. According to the assessee depreciation @ 60% is allowable on the UPS as it is a necessary and integral part of the computer. The CIT(A) did not accept such claim of the assessee.
3. At the time of hearing ld. A.R mainly placed reliance on the following two decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court:
(1) CIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd., I.T Appeal No.1267 decision dated 31st August, 2010, in which it has been held that depreciation is allowable @ 2 ITA NO. 6759/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05) 60% on computer accessories and peripherals such as printers, scanners, and server etc. being integral part of the computer system. (2) CIT vs. Orient Ceramics & Industries Ltd. (2011) 56 DTR (Del) 397, in which UPS has been held to be eligible for depreciation @ 60%. This was so held based on the basis of decision in the case of BSES Yamuna Power Ltd (supra)
4. The ld. A.R has placed copy of both the decisions in the paper book and a copy was also given to ld. D.R. Based on the aforementioned decisions ld. A.R contented that the assessee is eligible for 60% deprecation on UPS.
5. On the other hand, it was submitted by the ld. D.R that the decision in the case of CIT vs. Orient Ceramics & Industries Ltd.(supra) is based on the decision in the case of CIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd.(supra). He submitted that in the case of CIT vs. BSES Yamuna Power Ltd.(supra) the issue was not regarding depreciation on UPS. Therefore, ld. D.R submitted that UPS is not eligible for depreciation @ 60%, therefore, appeal of the assessee should be dismissed.
6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions in the light of the material placed before us. The decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Orient Ceramics & Industries Ltd.(supra) has clearly described that UPS is eligible for depreciation @ 60%. The observations of 'Their Lordships' from the said decision are reproduced as under:
"13. The third issue pertaining to deprpeciation on UPS arises only in the asst. yr. 2005-06. The assessee had claimed depreciation on UPS @ 60 per cent whereas the AO had allowed it @ 25 per cent and on this basis, disallowance of Rs. 1,470 was made. The issue now stands covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT vs. BSES Yamuna Powers Ltd. ( IT Appeal No.1267 decided on 31st Aug.2010) wherein it was held that the deprecation @ 60 per cent on such items shall be allowed."3 ITA NO. 6759/MUM/2010(A.Y. 2004-05)
7. No contrary decision has been brought to our notice, therefore, respectfully following the aforementioned decisions of Hon'ble Delhi High Court we allow the appeal filed by the assessee which raised only one issue regarding depreciation on UPS.
8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in the manner aforesaid.
Order pronounced in the open court on the 6th day of June 2012 Sd/- Sd/-
( G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA ) (I.P.BANSAL)
PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated 6th June 2012
Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT City -concerned
4. The CIT(A)- concerned 5. The D.R"B" Bench.
(True copy) By Order
Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai Benches
MUMBAI.
Vm.