2014 (12) TMI 1256

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 28.11.2007 for consideration of the following substantial question of law: "(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sanitary and pipe fittings fixed to the hotel building constituted 'plant' so as to be entitled to depreciation @ 25% despite these fittings being inseparably integrated with the building used as hotel in respect of which separate rate of deprecation 20% is provided w.e.f the assessment year 1988-89? (B) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in treating electrical installations in the building of the assessee used as hotel as a part of plant for the purposes of depreciat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the above and is not in a position to show and/or point out any contrary decision. 5. The apex court in the case of Anand Theatres (supra) has considered the decision in the case of Taj Mahal Hotel (supra) and held that sanitary fittings and the electrical installations are clearly "plant". Once they are regarded as plant the fact that they are used in a hotel building and fixed to the building does not render those fittings depreciable in the same manner as the building itself, when the provisions dealing with depreciation in the Act make a clear distinction among building, machinery and plant. When a thing by itself is to be classified under one head as "plant" or "building", it should not, normally, when used along with an item falling....