In Itxa/1326/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iii Pune v. Cooper Foundry Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: DATED : 14TH JUNE, 2011 P.C. :- 1.Whether the expenditure incurred on the cement foundation or reinforced cement concrete foundation is to be included in the cost of the windmill while granting depreciation at 80% on the windmill, is the question raised in this appeal.
Decision: In our opinion, the finding recorded by the Tribunal that RCC foundation forms integral part of the windmill is a finding of fact and no question of law arises from the same, Hence the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1326 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax III, Pune
..Appellant.
V/s.
Cooper Foundary Pvt. Ltd.
..Respondent.
Mr. Vimal Gupta for the appellant.
Ms. Aarti Sathe for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA JJ.
DATED : 14TH JUNE, 2011
P.C. :-
1.Whether the expenditure incurred on the cement foundation
or reinforced cement concrete foundation is to be included in the cost of the windmill while granting depreciation at 80% on the windmill, is the question raised in this appeal.
2.The Tribunal has recorded finding of fact that windmill was erected in the desert area of Rajasthan which required special foundation of reinforced cement concrete and that the said reinforced
cement concrete formed integral part of the windmill. The Tribunal has also followed the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Herdilla Chemicals Ltd. reported in [1995] 216 I.T.R. 742 (Bom) in allowing the claim of the assessee. In our opinion, the finding recorded by the Tribunal that RCC foundation forms integral part of the windmill is a finding of fact and no question of law arises from the same, Hence the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(SMT. R.P.SONDURBALDOTA, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, 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.