COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MAHENDRA MILLS

C.A. No.-005394-005394 - 1994Supreme Court15 March 200021 pages
For Petitioner: ARVIND KUMAR SHARMAFor Respondent: RR-EX-PARTE
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that depreciation allowance is a privilege that the assessee can choose to claim or not claim. It cannot be forced upon the assessee if not claimed, as a privilege cannot become a burden or an obligation.

What were the facts?

The Income-Tax Officer allowed depreciation to the assessee even though it was not claimed. The assessee appealed, and the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee. The Revenue appealed to the High Court, which also ruled in favor of the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether depreciation allowance can be granted by the Income-Tax Officer to an assessee when it has not been claimed by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32,Section 29,Section 34,Section 28

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 69 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

Cases cited in this judgment(10)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 21 PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. RESPONDENT: MAHENDRA MILLS DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/03/2000 BENCH: D.P.Wadhwa, S.S.M.Quadri

JUDGMENT: D.P. WADHWA, J. A common question of law arises in these appeals. It is: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the Income-tax Officer could not grant depreciation allowance to the assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 when the same was not claimed by the assesse?"

The question was referred at the instance of Revenue to the High Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (’Tribunal’ for short) for its opinion and answered in affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. This question has been answered differently by various High Courts one in favour of the assessee and the other in favour of the Revenue.

Section 32 has since been amended by the Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1986, with effect from 1.4.1988. However, the answer to the question remains of substantial im

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 32

All 2,762 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →