THIRD INCOME TAX OFFICER v. P K RAGHAVENDRA RAO
[Citation -1984-LL-0709-1]

Citation 1984-LL-0709-1
Appellant Name THIRD INCOME TAX OFFICER
Respondent Name P K RAGHAVENDRA RAO
Court ITAT
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 09/07/1984
Assessment Year 1980-81
Judgment View Judgment
Bot Summary: The Department s contention in this appeal is that the AAC is wrong in holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on lorries at the enhanced rate of 40 percent for the asst. The ITO allowed depreciation at 30 per cent with the observation that the enhanced rate of 40 per cent would come into effect only from 24th July, 1980 Rules, 1980, w.e.f 24th July, 1980 126 ITR St. 1). Before the AAC in appeal, the assessee claimed that since the assessment was made on 26th March, 1983, the assessee is entitled to enhanced rate of depreciation which is applicable to all the assessments pending as on the date of notification. The AAC accepted this contention relying on an order of CIT(A) in the case of M/s Annamalais Agencies, Coimbatore. We have heard the parties and would uphold the AAC s finding. 24th July, 1980 specifically mentioned the words at once. The Department s argument before us that the law as on the first days of the assessment year should be applied and that hence the rule inserted w.e.f. 24th July, 1980 would apply only from the asst. Following the above decisions, we would uphold the order of the AAC. The revenue s appeal is dismissed.


Department s contention in this appeal is that AAC is wrong in holding that assessee is entitled to depreciation on lorries at enhanced rate of 40 percent for asst. yr. 1980-81. ITO allowed depreciation at 30 per cent with observation that enhanced rate of 40 per cent would come into effect only from 24th July, 1980 (inserted by IT (Fifth Amendment) Rules, 1980, w.e.f 24th July, 1980 (1980) 126 ITR St. 1). Before AAC in appeal, assessee claimed that since assessment was made on 26th March, 1983, assessee is entitled to enhanced rate of depreciation which is applicable to all assessments pending as on date of notification. AAC accepted this contention relying on order of CIT(A) in case of M/s Annamalais Agencies, Coimbatore. We have heard parties and would uphold AAC s finding. same issue came up for consideration before Bench of Tribunal (1) (1983) 4 ITD 176 (Hyd): I.T.A. No. 64 (Hyd) of 1982 dt. 29th Jan., 1983 in case of South Indian Road Transport vs. ITO (Hyderabad Bench) (1984) 19 TTJ (Mad) 228: (1984) 7 ITD 111 (Mad); I.T.A. No. 1831 (Mad) of 1982 dt. 21st Oct., 1983, i n case of Rayalaseema Passenger & Goods Transport (P) Ltd. (Madras Branch) vs. IAC. In these orders, respective Benches noted that Notification dt. 24th July, 1980 specifically mentioned words (shall come into force) "at once". These words have significance, relief being intended for benefit of transport industry and would hence apply to asst. yr. 1980-81 as observed in first decision. Department s argument before us that law as on first days of assessment year should be applied and that hence rule inserted w.e.f. 24th July, 1980 would apply only from asst. yr. 1981- 82 is not acceptable, as such argument would negate significance of words "at once" in Notification inserting Rule. Following above decisions, we would uphold order of AAC. revenue s appeal is dismissed. *** THIRD INCOME TAX OFFICER v. P K RAGHAVENDRA RAO
Report Error