ASSTT. C I T vs. AVNISH CONSTRUCTION (P) LTD.

TAXAP/451/2000HC GujaratGJHC24022971200009 June 2014Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.J.THAKER3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The Revenue, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT), has appealed against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad Bench. The ITAT's order, dated November 29, 1999, pertained to Assessment Year 1989-90 and was made in ITA No. 225/Ahd/1994. The dispute concerns the eligibility of investment allowance for dumpers used by the assessee, Avnish Construction (P) Ltd. The High Court noted that an identical issue had been decided by a Division Bench of the same court in Income Tax Reference No. 221/1992.

Held

The High Court held that the question raised in the present Tax Appeal had already been answered by a Division Bench of the same court in Income Tax Reference No. 221/1992, by an order dated July 17, 2002. In that reference, the identical question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. This finding was not disputed by the Revenue's counsel. Therefore, following the precedent set by the Division Bench, the High Court answered the present appeal against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The appeal was disposed of accordingly. No specific reasoning beyond the reliance on the prior judgment was provided.

Key Issues

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in law in holding that the dumpers were used as earth moving machinery by the assessee and, therefore, the assessee was entitled to investment allowance? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee before the High Court. However, the ITAT's decision, which is being challenged, implies that the assessee argued for the dumpers to be classified as earth moving machinery to claim investment allowance. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through its learned advocate Shri Parikh, argued that the ITAT had erred in law by holding that dumpers qualify as earth moving machinery, thereby entitling the assessee to investment allowance.

Sections Cited

Section 10(2)(viia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

O/TAXAP/451/2000 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 451 of 2000

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER

====================================== 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 ? ====================================== ASSTT. C I T....Appellant(s) Versus AVNISH CONSTRUCTION (P) LTD.....Opponent(s) ====================================== Appearance: MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR SN SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ====================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER

Date : 09/06/2014

ORAL JUDGMENT O/TAXAP/451/2000

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.

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →