Itta/169/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv v. M/S. Nav Bharat Enterprises Limited
High Court
02 Jul 2013 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/169/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv v. M/S. Nav Bharat Enterprises Limited
Date of order
02 Jul 2013
Assessment year(s)
2005-2006
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Itta/169/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv v. M/S. Nav Bharat Enterprises Limited, the High Court (2013) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Sengupta) This appeal is sought to be admitted on the following suggested question of law: Whether in the facts and circumstances ofthe case and in law, Hon’ble ITAT is justified inholding that depreciation is allowable on assetsincluded in the block of assets without consideringthe fact that the as...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULYTWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA
AND
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI
I.T.T.A. No.169 OF 2013
Between:Commissioner of Income Tax-IVHyderabad
..... Appellant
AND
Dr. P.Ravishankar
.....Respondent
The Court made the following :
JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta)
This appeal is sought to be admitted on the following
suggested question of law:
Whether in the facts and circumstances ofthe case and in law, Hon’ble ITAT is justified inholding that depreciation is allowable on assetsincluded in the block of assets without consideringthe fact that the assessee has not put such assets touse during the relevant previous year ended on31.3.2005?
This appeal has been preferred against thejudgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated3.8.2012 in relation to the assessment year 2005-2006.The learned Tribunal while rendering the judgmentrecorded fact-finding that the assessee had not stoppedits business activities and the block of assets are put inuse of such business. Under the circumstances,depreciation has to be allowed in law, as provided underSec. 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 32 (1)provides that the depreciation of buildings, machinery,plant or furniture being tangible assets, owned wholly orpartly, by the assessee and used for the purposes of thebusiness or profession, the following deductions shall be
allowed
(i)………..
(ii) in the case of any block of assets, suchpercentage on the written down value thereof as maybe prescribed.
Under the circumstances, no question of lawrequires to be decided, as the application of law dependsupon the fact-finding and the fact-finding has been arrivedat by both the authorities below
Therefore, we do not see any ground to interferewith the impugned judgment and order. Consequently, theappeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
_______________________
Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ.
July 02, 2013MAS
__________G.Rohini, J.
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.