Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C.I.T. versus M/S A.B.CO. LTD.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


C.I.T. v. M/S A.B.Co. Ltd. - INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 111 of 1990 [2005] RD-AH 62 (5 January 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 37

I.T. R. No. 111 of 1990

C.I.T. Vs.. M/s Agra Beverages Corporation (P) Ltd., Sikandara, Agra.

Hon'ble R.K.Agrawal, J.

Hon'ble Prakash Krishna, J.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question of law under Section 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act for opinion to this Court, relating to the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83:-

"Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the bottles and crates in assessee's case did not constitute its stock-in-trade and should be treated as Plant?"

The assessee is a private limited company. During the course of assessment proceedings it claimed 100 per cent depreciation under section 32 (1) (ii) of the Act on bottle and  crates treating these as Plant used in business of manufacture of soft drinks run by the assessee company all along in the past had been treating bottles and crates as stock in trade. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) held that the appellant is entitled to 100 percent depreciation on crates and bottles as each of items is in the nature of Plant and each of items is less than Rs.750/- in value. On further appeal by the Department, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has confirmed the finding of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

We have heard Shri Shambhu Chopra, learned counsel for the Revenue. None appeared on behalf of the assessee respondent.

The learned standing  counsel for the department accepted the position that the above controversy is no longer res integra and has been finally concluded by the judgment of various High Courts including that of CIT vs. Prem Nath Monga Bottlers Pvt. Ltd. 226 ITR 864.  The Delhi High Court has followed the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court given in the case of CIT vs. National Air Products Limited (1980) 126 ITR 196 and has held that the bottles and shells used by the assessee constitute Plant for the purpose of Section 32 (1) (ii) of the Act. It has also observed that the Supreme Court has dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed against the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court [(See (1994) 209 ITR (ST) 85)].

 Respectfully following the aforesaid judgment of the Delhi High Court  we hold that the bottles and crates in the assessee's case should be treated as Plant for the purpose of depreciation under section 32 (1) (ii) of the Act.

In the result we answer the above question of law referred to use in affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Department. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Dt. 5.1.2005



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.