9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oy and Brothers, in the other two references the assessee is Messrs. New Guna Shenoy and Company, yet all these four references relate to assessment year 1984-85 and 1985-86. The Revenue has brought these four references against the finding of the Tribunal treating the building constructed by the assessee and used as cinema theatre constitutes plant as a whole and, therefore, entitled to higher rate of depreciation. Depreciation is an aspect statutorily provided under section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This court had an occasion to consider the statutory provisions of the said section in I.T.R. No. 155 of 1991 by the judgment dated August 5, 1996 (delivered by one of us-myself--on behalf of the Bench---CIT v. Damodar Corporation [19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely from each other. The process of reasoning found strength in the language of section 32A of the Act, relating to the investment allowance. Referring to the statutory provisions of section 32A of the Act we have also found out in support that the words "machinery and plant" occur with an exclusive character, as different from each other. We have also held that the provision of depreciation is available to the assessee and it is available to the assessee on the basis of his ownership or user of the property in regard to which a claim is under consideration for grant of depreciation. The said property, according to the statutory provision is referable to four sources, namely, building, plant, machinery and furniture. We have noted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fferent in the context and content. The question before us is whether the building constructed by the assessee and used as cinema theatre constitutes a plant as a whole. In our judgment, the language of the statutory provision with regard to its application would not be different in its application to the building used as a hotel or even if it is used as a cinema theatre or may be used as a factory in regard to the situation dealing with consideration of the grant of depreciation. The plain language of the section this court has analysed and we see no reason to take any view other than the one taken in I. T. R. No. 155 of 1991 (CIT v. Damodar Corporation [1997] 225 ITR 699). For all the above reasons, we answer the question in the negative ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
