The High Court dismissed the Single Judge's Certioration application for default due to 27-year delay and non-filing of paper books. The pending question of law on subsidy deduction and depreciation was kept open for future adjudication.
The S.J.C. application stands dismissed for default on the merits question in appropriate petition.
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.
S.J.C. No.02 of 1992
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the case subsidy received by the assessee under State Investment Sub-sidy Scheme was not to be deducted from the cost of the Plant and Machinery under Section 43(1) of the I.T. Act for determining their actual cost for the purpose of granting depreciation under Section 32 of the I.T. Act, 1961.”
However, the question of law raised in this application is kept open to be decided in appropriate petition.
……………….…….. ( K.R. Mohapatra ) Judge
SKJ/SKG
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that case subsidy received under State Investment Sub-sidy Scheme was not to be deducted from the cost of Plant and Machinery for depreciation purposes.
Income Tax Department
Assessee
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
