Swastika Investmart Limited v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Cir.-4(2), Mumbai
High Court
22 Mar 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Swastika Investmart Limited v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Cir.-4(2), Mumbai
Date of order
22 Mar 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Swastika Investmart Limited v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Cir.-4(2), Mumbai, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
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 AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.5694 OF 2010
Swastika Investmart Limited..Appellant.
Versus
Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Cir.-4(2), Mumbai..Respondent.
Mr.Mohan Salian with Mr.Jesse Cornelions i/by Gagrats for the appellant.Ms.Anamika Malhotra for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &
Smt.R.S. Dalvi, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 22[nd] March, 2011.
1.Heard. Admit on the following substantial question of law.
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, depreciation under section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is allowable on the BSE Card acquired by the Appellant Company ?
2.Counsel for the parties state that the aforesaid question is
already answered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Apex Court
in the case of Techno Shares and Stocks Limited V/s. Commissioner of
Income Tax reported in (2010) 327 ITR 323 (SC).
3.In this view of the matter, the appeal is disposed off by answering the question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs.
(Smt.R.S. Dalvi, 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.
EaseValue