Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Deepak Nitrite Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 136 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH Sd/- and Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Sd/- ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus DEEPAK NITRITE LTD. -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR BB NAYAK FOR MR MANISH R BHATT for Applicant. MR MANISH J.SHAH WITH MR JP SHAH for Respondent. -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH and MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Date of decision: 19/09/2001 ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH) �In this reference at the instance of the revenue, the following question has been referred for the opinion of this Court in respect of assessment year 1987-88 : the following question has been referred for the opinion "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to grant of depreciation on factory building and office building of Pune Unit 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 ?" 2�We have heard Mr.B.B.Nayak, learned Counsel for the revenue and Mr.Manish J.Shah with Mr.J.P.Shah for the respondent-assessee. the revenue and Mr.Manish J.Shah with Mr.J.P.Shah for the 3�At the time of hearing this reference, learned Counsel point out that the controversy raised herein is concluded in C.I.T. vs. Deepak Nitrite Ltd.(2000) 243 I.T.R.825. Following the aforesaid decision we answer the question in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 4�The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. ���Sd/-��Sd/- ��(M.S.Shah,J)�(D.A.Mehta,J) m.m.bhatt