Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Mangalam Cinema Pvt Ltd
High Court
17 Sep 2001 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Mangalam Cinema Pvt Ltd
Date of order
17 Sep 2001
Assessment year(s)
1984-85
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Mangalam Cinema Pvt Ltd, the High Court (2001) decided the matter.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus MANGALAM CINEMA PVT LTD -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner No.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 176 of 1991
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
============================================================
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
MANGALAM CINEMA PVT LTD
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
and
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
Date of decision: 17/09/2001
ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH)
�In this reference at the instance of the revenue,
the following question is referred for the opinion of
this Court in respect of assessment year 1984-85 :-
"Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right
in law and on facts in directing the
Income-Tax Officer to allow depreciation
on cinema building at the rate applicable
to plant and machinery ?"
2.�We have heard Mr.M.R.Bhatt learned Counsel for
the revenue. Though served, none appears for the
respondent-assessee.
3.�Mr.Bhatt points out that the controversy raised
herein is concluded in favour of the revenue by the
decision of the Apex Court in the Case of C.I.T. V/s.
Anand Theaters 244 ITR 192.
4.�In view of the above decision, we answer the
above question in the negative i.e. in favour of the
revenue and against the assessee.
5.�The Reference accordingly stands disposed of with
no order as to costs.
���(M.S.Shah, J)�(D.A.Mehta, J)
'Bhavesh'
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue