SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Ker) 105

PARIPOORNAN, K.A.NAYAR
Commissioner of Income Tax – Appellant
Versus
Nidish Transport Corporation – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. These three references are at the instance of the Revenue. The respondents are assessees under the Income-tax Act (in short, the Act). In I.T.R. Nos.41 and 42 of 1983 the respondent is the same assessee. Therein the assessment years involved are 1976-77 and 1977-78. In I.T.R. NO. 148 of 1983 the assessee is a different person. The assessment year is 1977-78.

2. We heard counsel. The sole question that arises in these three cases in whether the assessees are entitled for depreciation on certain vehicles used by them in their business. Though the vehicles were purchased by the assessees during the relevant previous years, they have not been transferred in the assessees' own names in the certificate of registration. On this ground the assessees were denied the depreciation allowance for the vehicles. In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the assessees had become the de facto owners of the vehicles during the relevant previous years and so they are entitled to depreciation on those vehicles. The Appellate Tribunal concurred with the said view and dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue. Thereafter, at the instance of the Revenue the Appellate Tribun





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top