2016 (10) TMI 354

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 256 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that electrical installations and sanitary fittings should be regarded as “Plant” for the purpose of depreciation in scheme of Section 32 of the Act. He submitted that the Division Bench took the aforesaid view by following the decision of the Apex Court in the cases of CIT v. Taj Mahal Hotel, [1971 (8) TMI 2 - SUPREME Court ] and CIT v. Anand The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nery and eventually setting aside the order u/s.263 ? 2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee filed its return of income for the A.Y. 20022003 on 31.10.2002 declaring loss of ₹ 13,56,62,312/. The assessment was finalized u/s.143(3) of the Act on accepting the returned income. On electrical installations of ₹ 7,94,09,205/, the assessee claimed depreciation @ 25%, which .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Revenue and learned advocate Mr. B.S. Soparkar appearing for the assessee. 6. At the outset, Mr. Soparkar, learned counsel for the assessee, submitted that the controversy raised in this case stands settled by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Incometax v. Express Resorts Hotels Ltd., [2015] 56 taxmann.com 171 (Gujarat) wherein it has been held that el .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X