Assessee had installed two Solar Power Plants, one at Bikaner in Rajasthan, from which electricity was generated and sold to ‘Rajasthan Electricity Board’ and another at factory premises in IMT Manesar, Gurgaon. Solar Power Plant installed at Bikaner, Rajasthan, depreciation had been held to be allowed. However, in respect of other Solar Power Plant, depreciation is declined on basis that same had been installed in office premises. On appeal the Tribunal held that Solar Power Plant in question was of 160 Mega Watt capacity and, it could not be presumed that this was installed for meeting need of office only. Considering fact that Solar Power Plant was of very high capacity and it was stated that office building was part of factory and electricity so generated was used for factory only, authority below ought to have verified fact by making field inquiry. Therefore, matter is restored to file of Assessing Officer for verification; if office was part of factory building and electricity was generated for captive use of factory, depreciation should be allowed as per provision of law. (AY. 2015-16)
Viney Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT (2023) 202 ITD 533 (Delhi) (Trib.)
S. 32 : Depreciation-Plant and machinery-Solar Power Plant-Captive use of factory-Installed in office premises-Office building is part of factory and electricity so generated was used for factory-Matter remanded to Assessing Officer for verification.