Commissioner of Income-tax, Kol-IV, Kol v. East India Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd
[Citation -2015-LL-0116-33]
Citation | 2015-LL-0116-33 |
---|---|
Appellant Name | Commissioner of Income-tax, Kol-IV, Kol |
Respondent Name | East India Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd. |
Court | HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA |
Relevant Act | Income-tax |
Date of Order | 16/01/2015 |
Judgment | View Judgment |
Keyword Tags | plant and machinery |
Bot Summary: | 2 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. Tribunal has erred in law in allowing the claim of depreciation and expenses made by the assessee on the Unit which had not been used for a single day throughout the year Md.Nizamuddin, learned advocate appearing for the Revenue drew our attention to section 32 of the I.T. Act and submitted that there are two conditions before any depreciation can be claimed; a) the object must be owned by the assessee and b) the object must be used for the purpose of business or profession. By introducing the said provision, the Legislature wanted to give the benefit of depreciation of the plant and machinery purchased by the 3 assessee and used for the purpose of business. The word used should be interpreted to mean a situation where the machineries which are required for implementing the nature of business the assessee runs, have been kept ready for use for the above purpose. In other words, if the assessee purchases a machine which is not required at all having regard to the nature of the business carried on by the assessee, he will not be entitled to the benefit of depreciation because the said machinery is not meant for the use in the business of the assessee. If in a given assessment year, the assessee did not get any order of manufacture of that particular item necessitating the use of that particular machinery, for that reason, he should not be deprived of the benefit of depreciation of that machinery although the same was ready for use whenever an order of manufacture of such item would come. In the case before us, the assessee was ready for doing his business. Notwithstanding such adverse law and order situation, the assessee did not abandon its business but suffered loss for such a state of affairs prevailing in that State over which he had no control with an expectation of resuming the business. |