ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. HARPER COLLINS PUBLISHERS INDIA LTD.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Harper Collins Publishers India Ltd.
Click here to view full judgement.
Pramod Kumar, Member (A) -
(1.) BY way of this appeal, the appellant Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of learned Commissioner (Appeals)'s order dated 31st August, 2010, in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the assessment year 2004 -05.
(2.) GROUND no. 1 and 5 are general in nature and do not require any specific adjudication. In ground no. 2, the Assessing Officer has raised the following grievance:
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,59,446 made by the AO on account of replacement of software as capital expenditure.
(3.) SO far as this issue is concerned, suffice to note that while the AO disallowed Rs. 2,00,000 paid towards purchase of financial accounting software and Rs. 27,780 for upgrading the MS Office XP software, and another Rs. 60,000 under the belief that this amount represents payment for software for which no bill is produced, on the ground that these software are new assets, he allowed depreciation in respect of the same. When the matter travelled in appeal before the CIT(A), she noted that there is no independent payment of Rs. 60,000 -it is already included in the payment of Rs. 2,00,000 and as such this disallowance was made because of wrong appreciation of facts. As regards the payments made for software, she noted that these payments were merely for upgradation of existing software used by the assessee, and, as such, the amounts so paid cannot be treated as payments for new assets. The disallowances were thus deleted. The AO is aggrieved of the relief so granted by the CIT(A) and is in appeal before us.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.