Research › Browse › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1991 DIGILAW 327 (MAD)

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Coromandel Leathers Private Limited

1991-04-16

RATNAM, SOMASUNDARAM

body1991
Judgment :- RATNAM, J. In this tax case reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law has been referred to this court for its opinion Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly held that the cost of the plant and machinery could not be reduced by the amount of subsidy received by the assessee-company from SIPCOT for computing the depreciation and investment allowance admissible to it ? " Recently, we had occasion to consider an identical question while dealing with Srinivas Industries v. CIT 1991 (188) ITR 22, 1991 (92) CTR 17, 1991 (56) TAXMAN 68, 1991 (92) CTR(Mad) 17. It is not in dispute that the answer returned in that reference would be applicable to this reference as well. In view of that, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Revenue. There will be no order as to costs.