9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of M.M. Fisheries (P) Ltd. v/s. CIT, 277 ITR 204 (Del.) 3. The Ld. A.R., on the other hand, tried to justify the first appellate order. He submitted that the facts of the present case are different from the facts in the case of M.M. Fisheries (P) Ltd. v/s. CIT (Supra) before the Hon ble Delhi High Court wherein the director had purchased the vehicle whereas in the present case, ownership of the vehicle was lying with the Company as the same was purchased with the funds of the Company. In this regard, he referred page No. 1, para No. 1.3 of the Paper Book. He submitted that the cars in question were purchased by the Company and registered in the name of the Managing Director of the Company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first appellate order are being reproduced hereunder for ready reference : 4. During the course of appellate proceedings the appellant company has stated that though the motor cars were registered in the name of the Managing Director, the company had passed necessary resolution authorising this purchase and that the cars were to be used by the appellant company for its business, and that the Managing Director had not claimed ownership or depreciation in respect of the aforesaid vehicles. For the purpose of its submissions regarding the concept of beneficial ownership, the appellant company cited decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Minerals Ltd. Vs. CIT, 239 ITR 775; in which it was held that when assessee was in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered by the appellant and have gone through the latest decision of ITAT Pune Bench dated 29.08.2008 in the case of Rohan Builders Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT. It is noticed that the ITAT has considered the two decisions of Bombay High Court mentioned above i.e. in the case of CIT Vs. Dilip Singh Sardarshingh Bagga and CIT Vs. Mirza Ataullaha Baig and another as well as the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Mysore Minerals Ltd. It was held that depreciation was allowable in respect of vehicles owned by the company and used for its business, even though it was registered in the names of the Directors of the company. In view of the above discussion it is held that the depreciation was allowable to the appellant in respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
