The Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s. Stovec Screens India Pvt
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Income Tax Act, 1961 s. 32(1)(iv)
Judgment
Mr. Ashok Kotangale for Applicant. Mr. J.D. Mistry with Ms.Toral Shah i/by Tyabji Dayabhai for Respondents. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO &&& CORAM: F.I. REBELLO J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED: JULY 25, 2007 DATED: JULY 25, 2007 DATED: JULY 25, 2007 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The following question was referred in both the References : "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the perforated nickel rotary screens manufactured by the assessee in its factory can be regarded as "Industrial machinery" within the meaning of Item No. 8 of the 9th Schedule to the Income tax Act, 1961 to entitle the assessee to get initial depreciation in respect of its plant and machinery in its factory under section 32(1)(iv) of the Income tax Act, 1961?" ((-2-)) . The tax incident in both the cases is less than four lakhs. In the light of that reference returned as unanswered. (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 32(1)(iv).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 25 Jul 2007. The bench was P DEVADHAR, F I REBELLO.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.