Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Chennai Plintron Mobility Solutions Pvt Ltd, ... vs Ito, Corporate Ward 5(2), Chennai on 27 October, 2021 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, 'ए' यायपीठ, चे ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'A' BENCH, CHENNAI ी धु वु आर. एल रे डी, या यक सद य एवं ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद य के सम BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 104/Chny/2018 िनधारण वष / Assessment Year: 201415 M/s. Plintron Mobility Solutions Income Tax Officer, Pvt. Ltd., v. Corporate Ward 5(2), Formerly known as Plintron Global Chennai 600 034. Technology Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Block 6, 3rd Floor, DLF IT SEZ, GKS Tech Park, 1/124, Shivaji Gardern, Ramapuram, Chennai 600 089. [PAN: AABCL 4077E] (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. R. Viswanathan, CA यथ क ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 21.10.2021 घोषणा क तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 27.10.2021 आदे श /O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned CIT(A)3, Chennai, dated 30.08.2017 and pertains to assessment year 201415. :2: ITA. No: 104/Chny/2018 2. The ld.AR for the assessee at the time of hearing submitted that there is a delay of 12 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal for which necessary petition for condonation of appeal along with affidavit has been filed explaining the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The ld.AR further submitted that the delay was unintentional on account of administrative activities associated with the merger activities in making ready the appeal papers and submits that substantive issues of law and facts are involved in the appeal against the assessment. The delay in filing the appeal was not intentional and that there is no undue benefit in delay in filing the appeal by 12 days. The Ld. DR opposed condonation of appeal. Having heard both sides, we are of the considered view that reasons given by the assessee for not filing the appeal within the time allowed under the Act comes under reasonable cause as provided under the Act for condonation of delay and hence, delay in filing of above appeal is condoned and appeal filed by the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: :3: ITA. No: 104/Chny/2018 " 1. The order dated 30.08.2016 of the Learned CIT(A) Appeals3, Chennai in ITA No. 193/201617 for the Assessment year AY 201415 is contrary to facts, opposed to law and untenable. Whether Depreciation on Software purchase is 60% or 25% 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in rejecting the claim of Depreciation on Software License at 60% and allowing depreciation at 25%. 2.1 The Ld CIT(A) grossly erred in not following the Rule 5 governing the Rate of depreciation of Software. 2.2 The Ld CIT(A) further erred in following the word the word License was mentioned in the documents and the word license and the right to use the software do not alter the purchase of Software. Non deduction of TDS on Purchase of Software is Royalty 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly erred in following the ratio of the case law in M/s. Poompuhar Shipping Corporation ltd Vs ITO International taxation II Chennai dated 09.10.2013. 3.1 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) grossly erred in following case laws which are distinguishable. Addition on Depreciation and on Royalty has been considered twice: 4. Ld CIT(A) grossly erred in not verifying the fact the Cost of the software disallowed in both u/s. 32(2) and u/s. 40a(i). For these and other grounds that may be permitted to be adduced before or during the course of hearing, the Appellant prays that the appeal be allowed and the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) be deleted." 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of providing software :4: ITA. No: 104/Chny/2018 solutions, filed its return of income for assessment year 2014 15 on 29.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 79,54,530/. The