Case Law Details
Shri.Ram Karan Yadav Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
There is no dispute that the assessee has purchased the JCB machine vide Invoice dated 3rd June, 2011 and delivery was taken on 6th June, 2011. However, the registration of JCB with the RTO was done on 29.08.2011. We further note that in the registration charges, the RTO has recovered a penalty of Rs. 5708/- on account of delay in registration and, therefore, the delay in registration was regularized by the Office of the RTO by levying the penalty. It is not the case of the A.O. that the assessee has not used the JCB for the business purposes and further when the assessee has received the hire charges from use of JCB during the year under consideration, then the mere delay in registration would not negate the fact of use of JCB by the assessee. It is pertinent to note that the JCB is not a transportation vehicle but a machine used in digging and other excavation of work and, therefore, practically it is possible to use the JCB without getting the registration. Further, when the registration was granted with a penalty on account of delay in registration, the said defect was removed by paying the penalty and accordingly the claim of depreciation on the JCB cannot be disallowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
These three appeals by the assessee are directed against three separate orders of ld. CIT (Appeals), Ajmer all dated 1st May, 2018 for the assessment years 2010-11 to 12-13. For the assessment year 2010-11, the assessee has raised the following grounds :-
“ Under the facts & circumstances of case the ld. CIT (A) has erred in :-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
