The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Nagpur v. M/S. Dhanlaxmi Borewell Corporation, Nagpur
High Court
28 Jan 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · testcase
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Nagpur v. M/S. Dhanlaxmi Borewell Corporation, Nagpur
Date of order
28 Jan 2016
Assessment year(s)
1985-86
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Nagpur v. M/S. Dhanlaxmi Borewell Corporation, Nagpur, the High Court (2016) 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Income Tax Reference No.73(B) of 1993
(The Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur vs. M/s. Dhanlaxmi Borewell Corporation, Nagpur)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=Office notes, Office Memoranda ofCoram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Ordersor directions and Registrar’s orders.=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for the Applicant.
CORAM: B.P. DHARMADHIKARI ANDV.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
th JANUARY, 2016.
DATE : 28
The reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is for assessment year 1985-86. The question isabout availability of special rate of depreciation under Section32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
The net profit as per profit and loss account acceptedby revenue was Rs.1,36,742/- and the boring rig cost in relationto which depreciation arises was Rs.10,21,515/-.
After claiming special depreciation, assessee hasclaimed loss.
It is not necessary for us to delve into the niceties, as
the tax effect cannot exceed Rs.20.00 lacs.
In this situation and in the light of Circular No.21,dated 10/12/2015, the reference is returned unanswered. Nocosts.
*sandesh
JUDGE
JUDGE
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