Gujarat High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I vs Deepak Nitrite Ltd. - Opponent on 28 July, 2008
Author: K.A.Puj
Bench: K. A. Puj
TAXAP/357/2008 1/3 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL No.357 of 2008
=========================================================
=
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I - Appellant
Versus
DEEPAK NITRITE LTD. - Opponent
=========================================================
= Appearance :
MRS MAUNA M BHATT for Appellant.
None for Opponent.
=========================================================
=
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. A. PUJ
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BANKIM N. MEHTA
Date : 28/07/2008
ORAL ORDER
(Per : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.A.PUJ) Heard Ms.Mauna M. Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue.
2. The Revenue has filed this Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1991-92 proposing to formulate the following question of law:
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the CIT (A) HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sat Jun 18 02:20:33 IST 2016 TAXAP/357/2008 2/3 ORDER whereby he allowed depreciation on the factory and office building at Pune, despite the sale deed not having been executed in favour of the assessee and the property not standing in its name and hence not "owned" by the assessee in terms of Section 32 of the Act, by disregarding the binding ratio of the Apex Court in the case of Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT, 249 ITR 214 (SC)?"
3. An identical question arose before this Court in assessee's own case in Income Tax Reference No.23 of 1996 with Tax Appeal No.150 of 1999. The question posed before this Court in the said Tax Reference as well as Tax Appeal was as under:
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the assessee is entitled to grant of depreciation on factory building and office building though the conveyance deed in respect of these properties was not registered in favour of the assessee till the end of the accounting year relevant to the previous year under consideration?"
While answering the said question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue, this Court has held that since assessee acquired the possession and was running factory on payment of substantial part of price, the assessee was entitled to grant of depreciation on the factory building though the conveyance deed in respect of these properties was not registered in favour of the assessee till the end of the accounting year relevant to the previous year under consideration. While deciding the Tax Reference and the Tax Appeal in favour of the assessee, this Court has referred to decision of the HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sat Jun 18 02:20:33 IST 2016 TAXAP/357/2008 3/3 ORDER Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Minerals Limited vs. CIT [1999] 239 ITR 775 (SC).
4. Following the aforesaid decision of this Court in the assessee's own case, we are of the view that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We are, therefore, not formulating any question of law as no question of law is arising out of the order of the Tribunal and even if such question arises, the same is concluded by the decision of this Court in the assessee's own case.
Therefore, the Tax Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
[K.A. Puj, J.] [Bankim N. Mehta, J.] Rajendra HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sat Jun 18 02:20:33 IST 2016