IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8481 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.27718/2014) AWASTHI TRADERS ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, AGRA AND ANR ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8738 OF 2016 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 10169/2014) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8739 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.14325/2014) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8740 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.15210/2014) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8741 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.15352/2014) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8742 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.15447/2014) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8743 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.2720/2016) CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).8744 OF 2016 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.22533/2014) ORDER C.A. No.....@ SLP(C) No.27718/2014 Leave granted. Signature Not Verified Admittedly, proviso to Section Digitally signed by CHARANJEET KAUR Date: 2016.09.03 13:00:38 IST Reason: 44AD of Income Tax Act, 1961, (herein after referred to as 'the Act') is applicable to 2 appellant-assesse in view of fact that its income for assessment year in question, i.e. 2009-2010, is above Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees forty lakhs only). If that is so, bar to entitlement for depreciation under Section 44A(2) of Act will not apply. Grant of depreciation under Section 32 of Act would, therefore, become mandatory. above facts have been over looked by High Court in holding that Section 44AD is applicable to case of appellant-assessee. We, therefore, set aside order of High Court as well as order of assessment and direct that necessary steps be taken in accordance with law so far as assessment year 2009-2010 is concerned. appeal is disposed of in above terms. C.A. Nos.....@ SLP(C)...CC No. 10169/2014, SLP(C) Nos. 14325/2014, 15210/2014, 15352/2014, 15447/2014, 2720/2016 and 22533/2014 Delay condoned. Leave granted. order passed in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(C) No.27718 of 2014 shall govern 3 these cases also. However, if on verification, it is found that income of assessee(s) is less than Rs.40,00,000/- (Rupees forty lakhs only) and, therefore, proviso to Section 44AD of Income Tax Act, 1961 has application implication, respondents may seek modification of this order. appeals are disposed of accordingly. ....................,J. (RANJAN GOGOI) ....................,J. (PRAFULLA C. PANT) NEW DELHI AUGUST 30, 2016 4 ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.6 SECTION IIIA SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 27718/2014 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 27/05/2014 in WT No. 640/2013 passed by High Court of Judicature at Allahabad) AWASTHI TRADERS Petitioner(s) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I,AGRA AND ANR Respondent(s) (with interim relief and office report) WITH S.L.P.(C)...CC No. 10169/2014 (With appln.(s) for c/delay in filing and refiling, permission to file additional documents, Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 14325/2014 (With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents, permission to file additional documents, Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 15210/2014 (With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents, permission to file additional documents, Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 15352/2014 (With (With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents and appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents and Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 15447/2014 (With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents, permission to file additional documents, Interim Relief and Office Report) SLP(C) No. 2720/2016 (With Office Report) SLP(C) No. 22533/2014 (With appln.(s) for permission to file additional documents, permission to file additional documents, c/delay in refiling SLP and Office Report) 5 Date: 30/08/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAFULLA C. PANT For Petitioner(s) Mr. Pawanshree Agrawal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv. Mr. H. Raghavendra Rao, Adv. Mr. Arijit Prasad, Adv. Ms. Mukti Choudhary, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. Mr. B. V. Balaram Das,Adv. UPON hearing counsel Court made following ORDER Delay condoned. appeals are disposed of in terms of signed order. As sequel to above, all pending interlocutory applications are also disposed of. (Neetu Khajuria) (Madhu Narula) Court Master Court Master (Signed order is placed on file.) Awasthi Traders v. Commissioner of Income-tax-I, Agra and Anr