The Delhi High Court heard an income tax appeal challenging an ITAT order that allowed depreciation on the self-occupied portion of DLF Centre. The court dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed, but with no orders as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~
versus
DLF LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha &, Ms. Roopali Gupta, Advocates
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
O R D E R % 05.09.2017
“Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law in allowing the depreciation on DLF Centre amounting to Rs.31,00,307/in respect of its self-occupied portion?”
ITA 815/2009
Page 1 of 2
against the Revenue.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
SEPTEMBER 05, 2017
rd
ITA 815/2009
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the CIT (A) erred in law allowing depreciation amounting to Rs.31,00,307 regarding the self-occupied portion of DLF Centre?
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
DLF LTD.
S. MURALIDHAR
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
