1987 (2) TMI 22

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he land and building at Bombay for the assessment year 1973-74 ? " The assessment year in question is 1973-74. The assessee is a private limited company carrying on business in armatures, laminations and stampings. For the purpose of this business, for its Bombay office, it purchased a building in Bombay on March 13, 1971. The conveyance deed in respect of that property was, however, not registered in the relevant previous year. The assessee claimed depreciation in respect of the building in the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1973-74 and also in the assessment proceedings for the preceding assessment year 1972-73. The claim for depreciation was rejected by the Income-tax Officer for both the assessment years on the ground....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the head "Income from house property ". Section 32(1) of the Act deals with depreciation in respect of buildings " owned by the assessee and used for the purposes of the business ....... .. In R. B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC), the question for decision before the Supreme Court was whether for the purposes of section 9 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the owner must be the person who can exercise the rights of the owner, not on behalf of the owner but in his own right. The property in that case consisted of a hotel in Lahore. After the creation of Pakistan, the property vested in the Custodian of Evacuee Property, but technically the assessee continued to be the owner although he had no dominion over, or possession ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reted the law in the manner Mr. Mahajan wants us to interpret. " In respect of the very same assessee for the previous assessment year, this court in R. C. No. 91 of 1978 answered an identical question on August 23, 1984, in favour of the assessee (CIT v. Shahney Steel & Press Works (P.) Ltd. [1987] 165 ITR 399 (AP)). This court accepted the view of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Steelcrete P. Ltd. [1983] 142 ITR 45 and of the Allahabad High Court in Addl. CIT v. U. P. State Agro Industrial Corporation [1981] 127 ITR 97. The same view was taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Smt. Kala Rani v. CIT [1981] 130 ITR 321. Sri M. S. N. Murthy, learned standing counsel for the Revenue, cited to us a decision of the Supreme Court i....