CIT v. Geo Tech Construction Corporation

244 ITR 452High Court2000#5128 most cited

What is CIT v. Geo Tech Construction Corporation authority for?

An asset can be considered 'used' for business purposes, entitling the assessee to depreciation, even if it was only passively used or kept ready for use. The definition of 'used' for depreciation purposes is broader than actual physical employment.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,369 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2022.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Geo Tech Construction Corporation · 244 ITR 452 · depreciation · passive use · ready for use · section 32 · user for business · plant and machinery · asset kept ready

Also reported as

206 CTR 141

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 80A(6)Section 80IASection 80IA(8)

Judgments citing CIT v. Geo Tech Construction Corporation

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi VI vs. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd

Appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 235 / 2008HC Delhi05 Aug 2010
Section 32(1)Section 37(2)Section 40ASection 43ASection 43B

…are as poles as under and the court cannot invoke an equitable rule in the construction of a taxing statute." - 9 The High Court of Allahabad, in CIT Vs. Bombay Bhushan Press, 143 CTR 52 and the Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. GEO Tech Construction Corporation, 244 ITR 45 held same view while interpreting the unamended provision. Therefore, we answer this question in affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. - 10 Coming to guestion no.1 as proposed by the Department in this appeal relates to disallowing certain expenditures due to hospitality and sale promotion expenses to be in the nature…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi vs. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd

Appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 258 / 2009HC Delhi05 Aug 2010
Section 32(1)Section 37(2)Section 40ASection 43ASection 43B

…re as poles as under and the court cannot invoke an equitable rule in the construction of a taxing statute." - The High Court of Allahabad, in CIT Vs. Bombay Bhushan Press, 9. 143 CTR 52 and the Kerala High Court in CIT Vs. GEO Tech Construction Corporation, 244 ITR 45 held same view while interpreting the unamended provision. Therefore, we answer this question in affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. - Coming to question no.1 as proposed by the Department in this 10. appeal relates to disallowing certain expenditures due to hospitality and sale promotion expenses to be in the natur…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi VI vs. Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd

Appeals are disposed of accordingly

ITA - 236 / 2008HC Delhi05 Aug 2010
Section 32(1)Section 37(2)Section 40ASection 43ASection 43B

…as poles as under and the court cannot invoke an equitable rule in the construction of a taxing statute." - 9. The High Court of Allahabad, in *CIT Vs. Bombay Bhushan Press*, 143 CTR 52 and the Kerala High Court in *CIT Vs. GEO Tech Construction*Corporation, 244 ITR 45 held same view while interpreting the unamended provision. Therefore, we answer this question in affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. - Coming to question no.1 as proposed by the Department in this 10. appeal relates to disallowing certain expenditures due to hospitality and sale promotion expenses to be in the natur…