C/TAXAP/836/2019 ORDER IN HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 836 of 2019 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus STEELCO GUJARAT LTD. Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) for Appellant(s) No. 1 for Opponent(s) No. 1 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA Date : 13/01/2020 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1. This Tax Appeal is filed under Section 260A of Income Act, 1961 (for short Act ) at instance of Revenue and it is directed against order dated 21.12.2019 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in ITA No.328/AHD/2015 for assessment year 2008 2009. 2. Revenue has proposed following questions of law as substantial questions of law involved in this appeal: 2(a) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ITAT has erred in law and on facts in allowing assessee's claim of carry forward and set off unabsorbed depreciation of assessment years 1995 96 to 1999 2000 against profit of assessment year Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 21 10:08:50 IST 2020 C/TAXAP/836/2019 ORDER 2008 09? (b) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, learned ATAT has erred in law and on facts in allowing assessee's claim of carry forward and set off unabsorbed depreciation of assessment year 1995 96 to 1999 2000 against profits of assessment year 2008 09 without appreciating fact that language of sub section (2) of Section 32 is clear and unambiguous and amendment in said section by Finance Act, 2001 was prospective w.e.f. 01.04.2002? (c) Whether in facts and circumstances of case, learned ITAT has erred in law and on facts in allowing assessee benefit of carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation of assessment year 1995 96 to 1999 2000 beyound period of eight assessment years in contravention of applicable provisions being Section 32(2) of Income Tax Act as amended by Finance (No.2) Act, 1996 w.e.f. 1st April, 1997? (d) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Tribunal was justified in dismissing departments appeal and allowing assessee's claim of carry forward and set off unabsorbed depreciation of assessment years 1995 96 to 1999 2000 against profits of assessment year 2008 09 by relying on decision in case of General Motors India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2013 354 ITR 244 Guj) without appreciating fact that Hon'ble High Court has given construction to language of amendment to provision of Section 32(2) of Income Tax Act which actually amount to casus omissus as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.P.Gupta v. President of India [AIR 1982 SC 149] & ACIT Vs. Velliappa Textile Ltd. Appeal (Crl) 142 of 19947 dated 16.09.2003. 4. Mr.Varun Patel, learned standing counsel appearing for Revenue very fairly pointed out that issues raised in present appeal are no Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 21 10:08:50 IST 2020 C/TAXAP/836/2019 ORDER longer res integra as those are squarely covered by decision of this Court in case of General Motors India (P) Ltd. v. DCIT (2013 354 ITR 244 Guj). 5. We also take notice of fact that very same decision has been referred and relied upon by Tribunal while dismissing appeal preferred by Revenue, and thereby, confirming order passed by CIT(Appeals). 6. In aforesaid view of matter, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) GIRISH Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Tue Jan 21 10:08:50 IST 2020 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. Steelco Gujarat Ltd