Case LawHigh Court › Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Shival...

Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Shivalik Hatcheries (P) Ltd

High Court 04 Aug 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · cmis
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Shivalik Hatcheries (P) Ltd
Date of order
04 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. M/S Shivalik Hatcheries (P) Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

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 HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Income-tax Appeal No. 2 of 2001 Date of decision: 4.8.2008 Commissioner of Income-tax Petitioner. Versus M/s Shivalik Hatcheries (P) Ltd. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Ahuja, J. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the petitioner: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Lovnesh Kanwar, Advocate. Per Deepak Gupta, J. This appeal has been admitted on the following questions of law:- 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding the poultry sheds and water lines for sheds as ‘plant’ for the purposes of depreciation allowance and investment allowance under the Income-tax Act? of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding the poultry sheds and water lines for sheds as ‘plant’ for the purposes of depreciation allowance and investment allowance under the Income-tax Act? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing extra shift allowance on poultry sheds, fencing, water tanks and well? circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing extra shift allowance on poultry sheds, fencing, water tanks and well? Identical questions of law arising between the same parties but in respect of different assessment years have been decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue vide our detailed judgement dated 24[th] June, 2008 delivered in ITR No. 6 of 1996. Parties agree that the aforesaid judgement is squarely applicable to this case also. Consequently, without giving any detailed reasons, but following the judgement delivered in ITR No. 6 of 1996 decided on 24[th] June, 2008, both the questions are decided against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeal is dismissed. ( Deepak Gupta ), J. 4[th] August, 2008 ™ ( V.K.Ahuja ), J.
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan