Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian partnership act Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat ahmedabad Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.153 seconds)

Jan 15 1999 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Sanghvi Textile Engg. (P) Ltd

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Decided on : Jan-15-1999

..... that even if a property contributed by partner be an immovable property, no document, registered or otherwise, is required for transferring the property to the partnership. in that view of the matter, the hon'ble high court has held that the assessee was entitled to the depreciation.14. in the instant case ..... b. jodha mal kuthiala vs. cit (supra) while interpreting the meaning of the expression 'owner' occurring in s. 22 of the act which is in pari materia with s. 9 of the indian it act, 1922, for the purpose of determining the question whether the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation under s. 32 of the ..... & mfg. co. ltd. (supra) the hon'ble calcutta high court has held that in order to claim the benefit of s. 32 of the it act, 1961, it is not necessary that the assessee should be a complete owner. the hon'ble calcutta high court has decided the issue taking into consideration the ..... orient longman (supra), the hon'ble andhra pradesh high court has held as under : "for purposes of claiming benefit under s. 32 of the it act, the requirement of ownership by the assessee will be deemed to be fulfilled if the assessee has the dominion and control over the property in his own ..... this particular judgment the hon'ble supreme court was dealing with the expression 'belonging to for the purpose of s. 2(m) of the wt act". after considering the several judgments the tribunal directed the ao to accept the assessee's claim for depreciation on both movable and immovable properties acquired even .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 15 1999 (TRI)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Sanghvi Textile Engg. (P) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Decided on : Jan-15-1999

Reported in : (1999)65TTJ(Ahd.)425

..... that even if a property contributed by partner be an immovable property, no document, registered or otherwise, is required for transferring the property to the partnership. in that view of the matter, the hon'ble high court has held that the assessee was entitled to the depreciation.in the instant case, ..... kuthiala v. cit (supra) while interpreting the meaning of the expression 'owner' occurring in s. 22 of the act which is in pari materia with s. 9 of the indian income tax act, 1922, for the purpose of determining the question whether the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation under section 32 of ..... (supra), the hon'ble andhra pradesh high court has held as under : "for purposes of claiming benefit under section 32 of the income tax act, the requirement of ownership by the assessee will be deemed to be fulfilled if the assessee has the dominion and control over the property in his ..... particular judgment the hon'ble supreme court was dealing with the expression 'belonging to for the purpose of s. 2(m) of the wealth tax act". after considering the several judgments the tribunal directed the assessing officer to accept the assessee's claim for depreciation on both movable and immovable properties ..... if assessee has dominion and control over the property in his own rights.for purposes of claiming benefit under section 32 of the income tax act, the requirement of ownership by the assessee will be deemed to be fulfilled if the assessee has the dominion and control over the property in .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //