Law:

Section:

Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Depreciation - Allowance/rate of - Assessment year 1988-89 - Whether furniture in hotel constitutes plant and 100 per cent depreciation can be allowed thereon - Held, no HELD In Appendix I, rule 125, which is with regard to depreciation table, the furniture is under separate head and the plant and machinery are also under separate head. The furniture cannot come under plant. Hence, the assessee is not entitled to 100 per cent depreciation. It is entitled to depreciation as per Appendix I. [Para 2] CASE REFERRED TO CIT v. Taj Mahal Hotel [1971] 82 ITR 44 (SC) [Para 1]. P.K. Ravindranatha Menon and George K. George for the Appellant. C. Sankunny and M.C. Madhavan for the Respondent. JUDGMENT S. Sankarasubban, J. - This appeal is filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Cochin against the judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench in ITA No. 124/Coch/93. Assessee is a company engaged in the business of running a hotel. For the assessment year 1988-89, the assessee-company claimed 100 per cent depreciation on furniture items costing less than Rs. 5,000. While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer disallowed this claim on the ground that these items cannot be considered as plant and machinery. In appeal, the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492