Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Cuttack)
The issue under consideration is whether the leasehold rights is considered as intangible assets and hence eligible for depreciation under section 32(1)(ii)?
ITAT states that, this issue is covered by decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the previous assessment year i.e. A.Y.2014-2015 in ITA Nos.264/CTK/2017, order dated 20.03.2018. The assessee has raised these additional grounds as per the direction of Hon’ble High Court of Orissa, Cuttack in W.P (C) No.24 of 2013 and Misc. Case No.5716 of 2013 order dated 20.3.2013. In view of above, ITAT admit these additional grounds for our consideration. On merits also, ITAT find force in the submission of ld D.R. that the depreciation is not allowable u/s.32(1)(iii) of the Act in respect of intangible assets, which is supported by judicial pronouncements cited above. In view of above, ITAT dismiss these grounds filed by the assessee. In view of above, ITAT hold that the lease hold rights are not eligible for depreciation u/s.32(1)(ii) of the Act considering it as intangible rights and, accordingly, dismiss the ground of appeal of the assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against order of CIT(A), Sambalpur, dated 28.03.2018 for the assessment year 2015-2016, on the following grounds of appeal :-
1. That the assessment order U/s.143(3) passed by the Learned Assessing Officer as well as the appellate order passed by the Learned CIT(Appeals), Cuttack, to the extent prejudicial to the assessee, is unjustified, arbitrary, excessive, contrary to evidences and bad in law.
2. That the Learned Assessing Officer as well as CIT (Appeals) has not provided sufficient opportunity to the assessee to present its case with all evidences.
3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the authorities below has erred in making/upholding followings additions/ disallowances in full/part:
