9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1155 - HC - Income TaxDeprecation on paper and copier disallowed - Assessee has not claimed deprecation in either its original return or in its revised return - ITAT allowed the claim - HELD THAT - ITAT has in the impugned order noted the fact that the order of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT, deciding the similar issues in favour of the Assessee for AY 2010-11 2019 (2) TMI 893 - ITAT AMRITSAR , was upheld by the Punjab and Haryana High Court 2017 (8) TMI 1511 - PUNJAB HARYANA HIGH COURT . Reference is also made to another judgement passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of CIT v. Ramco International 2008 (12) TMI 413 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT which in turn considered the case in Goetze India Ltd. v. CIT 2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT relied upon by the Revenue. No substantial question of law arises for consideration of the Court. The appeal is dismissed.
Issues:
Appeal by Revenue against ITAT order for AY 2013-14 regarding deprecation claim by Assessee. Analysis: The High Court of Delhi heard an appeal by the Revenue challenging an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. The main issue raised was whether the ITAT was correct in allowing deprecation to the Assessee for its paper and copier, even though the Assessee had not claimed deprecation in either the original or revised return. The ITAT, in its order, referred to a previous decision by the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT that ruled in favor of the Assessee for AY 2010-11. Additionally, the ITAT mentioned a judgment by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT v. Ramco International, which considered the precedent set in Goetze India Ltd. v. CIT, a case relied upon by the Revenue. The High Court, after considering the facts and legal precedents, concluded that no substantial question of law arose for its consideration. Therefore, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and no costs were awarded. The judgment highlighted the importance of legal precedents and consistency in decisions across different cases.
|
