Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Market...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Market Committee, Bhuna

High Court 24 Feb 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · phhc
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Market Committee, Bhuna
Date of order
24 Feb 2011
Assessment year(s)
2004-05
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Market Committee, Bhuna, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: No.2720/Del/2008 for the assessment year 2004-05 proposing following substantial question of law:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the Ld.

Decision: Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.

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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA ATCHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.827 of 2010 & connected case beingITA No.828 of 2010Date of decision: 24.2.2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Market Committee, Bhuna. -----Appellant. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOELHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:-Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr.Standing Counselfor the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue underSection 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”)against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NewDelhi in I.T.A. No.2720/Del/2008 for the assessment year 2004-05 proposing following substantial question of law:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, the Ld. ITAT was justified in holding thatthe depreciation on fixed asset is allowable in thecase of charitable trust/institution particularly when theincome is computed as per provisions of section 11 to13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as question ofdepreciation does not arise when capital expenditureis also considered as application of income of the assessee and there remains no assets/WDV for claimof depreciation?” Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that thematter is covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated5.7.2010 in I.T.A. No.535 of 2009 CITv. Market Committee,Pipli. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE February 24, 2011ashwani ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan