On appeal filed, the Tribunal held that,t he assessee added an amount of Rs\u00a03 crores, to the block of asset consisting of office building, which it claimed to have been paid to \u2018B\u2019, pursuant to \u2018B\u2019 withdrawing from the Court proceedings (Writ petition filed) before the High Court, objecting to the construction and obtaining stay against the construction. \u00a0Assessee contended that without such payment of Rs. 3 crores, its construction could not have been raised, hence it is part of construction cost. The Tribunal for earlier years had held that no payment can be said to have been made by the assessee to \u2018B\u2019 as there was no mention in memorandum, qua the proof of payment, in the terms of compromise note.\u00a0\u00a0 For present appeal, it is held that High Court admitting the appeals filed by the assessee for earlier years, could not impact the Tribunal to take a different view in the present appeals, as the Assessee had not filed any order of the High Court having modified or reversed the decision of the Tribunal of earlier years (AY.2011-12, 2014-15)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" S. 32 : Depreciation \u2014 Cost of construction of office Block – Compensation paid for easement rights not accepted by Tribunal in earlier years \u2014 High Court admitting Assessee\u2019s appeal against Tribunal not a reason to take a view in favour of Assessee \u2014 Assessee not entitled to depreciation.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12519","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-digest"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-3fV","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12519","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12519"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12519\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12520,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12519\/revisions\/12520"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12519"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12519"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12519"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}