COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. NAVDEEP POLYMERS PVT. LTD.

ITR/207/1994HC GujaratGJHC24020283199413 October 2005Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) has filed an Income Tax Reference before the Gujarat High Court concerning Assessment Year 1984-85. The reference arises from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) which directed the Income Tax Officer to allow depreciation at the rate of 30% on a diesel generating set. The ITAT had relied on its own previous decision in the case of C.I.T. vs. Nachmo Marketing Pvt. Ltd. The Revenue, represented by Mr. Tanvish U. Bhatt, appeared before the High Court, while the assessee, Navdeep Polymers Pvt. Ltd., did not appear despite being served.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court answered the referred question in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The Court noted that the ITAT had relied on its own decision in C.I.T. vs. Nachmo Marketing Pvt. Ltd. However, the Revenue brought to the Court's attention that this very decision had been the subject of an earlier reference (Income Tax Reference No.187 of 1993) before the same High Court. In that earlier reference, by an order dated 21/06/2005, the High Court had decided the controversy in question in favour of the Revenue. Therefore, following its own precedent, the High Court disposed of the present reference accordingly, answering the question against the assessee. No specific finding on the rate of depreciation itself was detailed, but the principle established was that the ITAT's direction was not sustainable in light of the High Court's prior ruling.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Income Tax Officer to allow depreciation at the rate of 30% on a diesel generating set (Question of law and fact, concerning the rate of depreciation applicable to a diesel generating set). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the ITAT's decision was incorrect. They pointed out that the ITAT's reliance on its own decision in C.I.T. vs. Nachmo Marketing Pvt. Ltd. was flawed, as this very decision had been challenged before the High Court. The Revenue highlighted that the High Court, in its order dated 21/06/2005 in Income Tax Reference No.187 of 1993, had decided the controversy in favour of the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITR/207/1994 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 207 of 1994 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI ================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - Applicant(s) Versus NAVDEEP POLYMERS PVT. LTD. - Respondent(s) ================================================= Appearance : MR TANVISH U BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, ================================================

ITR/207/1994 2/4 JUDGMENT CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA and HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI Date : 13/10/2005 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI) 1 The Income Tax Appellate Tr

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 256(1)

All 370 judgments and leading authorities on Section 256(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →