TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (3) TMI 173
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Home (P.) Ltd v. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 364 (Ker.) and ought to have justified the disallowance of depreciation to the assessee on the ground that the assessee is not the owner of the above vehicles and hence not entitled to depreciation. 3. We have heard Mrs. Deepali Bahadur, the learned D.R. for the Department and none appeared for the assessee. Though notice through RAPD was sent to the assessee on 15-11-1995 itself for the date of hearing fixed on 13-12-1995. We treat it that there is sufficient notice to the assessee and the assessee's absence on 13-12-1995 is intentional. We, therefore, proceeded to hear the case in the absence of the assessee, we came across the following decisions in CIT v. Mirza Ataullaha Baig [1993] 202 ITR 291 (Bo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....purchased by the assessee as a going concern for adequate consideration. Therefore, he held that the ownership of both the car and mini truck would undisputedly vest in the assessee-company. The learned CIT(A) further found that there are movable assets and that they have been purchased for consideration. He felt that the transfer of registration with the Transport Authority was only a consequential formality and the purchase is not vitiated against time taken in making consequential changes in the document of registration. He came to a considered view that it cannot be said that the assessee-company was not the owner of the vehicles. Thus he reversed the denial of depreciation by the Assessing Officer. Both the decisions cited on behalf of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... property and not with movable property. The question concerning the Bench was when does a title of immovable property validly passes. Now we are not concerned with the similar situation. We are concerned with the transfer of movable property. The formalities required to be fulfilled before a completed sale movable properly are quite different from the formalities which are required to be fulfilled in the case of immovable property. The transfer of movable property takes place, if only the conditions under the sale of Goods Act are complied with whereas the provisions of Registration Act are to be complied with for completion of transfer of immovable property. Thus we hold that the two decisions relied upon by the revenue even in their grou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt approved by quoting Calcutta High Court decision in Salkia Transport Associates' case and the Kerala High Court decision in Nidish Transport Corpn.'s case. In the Calcutta High Court decision their Lordships of the Bombay High Court found the Calcutta High Court laying down the law saying that registration is not an essential pre-requisite for the acquisition of ownership of the Motor Vehicle but an obligation cast upon the owner of the vehicle for the purpose of running the vehicle in public places. Hence it was immaterial whether the buses were registered in the assessee's name or the original owner's name. On the facts of that case, it was held that the assessee was the owner of the vehicles though the same were not registered in it....