ASST CIT 9(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. ETAM FUTURE FASHIONS P.LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3982/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 January 2018AY 2010-111 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the Revenue's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Section 32(1)(iii) applies only to undertakings engaged in power generation and distribution, not retail trading. Therefore, the assessee was not entitled to depreciation under that section. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in retail trading, claimed depreciation under Section 32(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act on the written-off value of assets. The Assessing Officer disallowed this, allowing only normal depreciation under Section 32(1)(i). The CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether depreciation under Section 32(1)(iii) is available to a retail trading business. Whether depreciation on discarded assets was correctly disallowed by the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32(1)(iii),Section 32(1)(i)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

set aside the order passed by the C IT(A) and uphold the addition made by the AO. 11. In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th January, 2018.

More judgments on Section 32(1)(iii)

All 45 judgments and leading authorities on Section 32(1)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →