Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Rangbahar Vs CIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 2240/Mum/2009
Date of Judgement/Order : 31/05/2010
Related Assessment Year : 2005-06
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Rangbahar Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT Mumbai)

In this case CIT (Commissioner of Income tax), disallowed depreciation on mobiles, as the assessee has not provided ‘the place of installation’ of Mobile Phones. Vide para 18 of the Revision Order of the CIT was of the opinion that the assessee has not provided “the place of installation of assets”, which in this case was of mobile phone was not given and therefore the claim of depreciation was not allowable. Mobile in itself means “able to move or be moved freely or easily.” As per Cambridge Dictionary Mobile means, “moving or walking around freely.” The World Book Encyclopaedia also says, “The Cellular (Mobile) Telephone is a movable telephone unit.” But, what to say about Income Tax Department who rejected Depreciation claim on Mobile Phones as place of Installation was not given.

Aggrieved with the Revisionary Order, Assessee approached Mumbai-IAT which settled the case in favour of assessee. ITAT ruled, “By very nature of mobile phone, this cannot be fixed to a particular place.” ITAT allowed depreciation without Place of Installation.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI

This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the CIT-18, Mumbai under section 263 of the I.T. Act dated 16.01.2009 for A.Y. 2005-06.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Author Bio

Abhishek Raja Ram - Popularly known as "Revolutionary Raja" is FCA, DISA, Certificate Courses on – Valuation, Indirect Taxes , GST etc, M. Com (F&T) Mr. Abhishek Raja “Ram” is a Fellow member of ICAI, qualified in 2006, and holds Master’s-Degree in Commerce. He has more than a 15 ye View Full Profile

My Published Posts

SC Scrutinizes GST Applicability on Joint Development Agreements: A Landmark Petition India’s Tobacco Industry: Rs 1 Lakh Penalty for Unregistered Packing Machines Can Non-Restoration of GST Registration be considered a violation of “Right to Livelihood” [Article 21 – Constitution of India]? HC grants Regular Bail to CA Gaurav Dhir in Gurgaon GST Refund Case Refund allowed in Inverted Duty Structure when Goods are supplied to Govt at Concessional Rates View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031