Ita/524/2009 Of The Federal Bank Ltd v. Assistant Commission Of Income Tax
High Court
26 Nov 2010 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/524/2009 Of The Federal Bank Ltd v. Assistant Commission Of Income Tax
Date of order
26 Nov 2010
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Ita/524/2009 Of The Federal Bank Ltd v. Assistant Commission Of Income Tax, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: Consequently appeal is dismissed.
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 KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY
FRIDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1932
ITA.No. 524 of 2009()
---------------------
ITA.501(COCH)/2005 of INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH
....................
APPELLANT/APPELLANT
-------------------------------------
THE FEDERAL BANK LTD.,
ALUVA.
BY SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA, SENIOR ADVOCATE,
ADV. SRI.TERRY V.JAMES.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
CIRCLE-1, ALUVA.
2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
KOCHI.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC FOR INCOME TAX.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 26/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, &BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ.
--------------------------------------------
I. T. A. No. 524 of 2009
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of November, 2010
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
Two questions are raised in the appeal filed by the appellantBank. After hearing counsel for the appellant, and standing counsel forthe respondent, and on going through the Tribunal's order, we do notfind any merit in the appeal because the first issue pertains toappellant's claim for higher depreciation of 60% on EPABX andmobile phones. The rate of depreciation of 60% is available tocomputers and we do not find any ground to treat the communicationequipments as computers. In our view, Tribunal rightly held that theseequipments are not computers entitling the assessee for depreciation at60%. So much so, this appeal on this issue is rejected. So far as thesecond issue of prior period expenditure is concerned, disallowance isconfirmed by the Tribunal for want of evidence. We do not find any
ITA 524/2009
substantial question of law arising on this issue.
Consequently appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)
Judge.
Sd/-
(BHABANI PRASAD RAY)
Judge.
True copy
PS to Judge
kk
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.