COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN respect of the asst. yr. 1971-72 the following questions have been referred under S. 256 (1) of the IT Act, 1961:

(2.) THE building owned by the assessee bank has six floors of which third floor has been let out the other floors are under the occupation of the assessee wherein it carries on its business. In respect of the very property similar questions arose during the asst. yrs. 1960-61 to 1965-66 which were considered by this Court. The decision is reported in Punjab National Bank Ltd. vs. CIT (1983) 141 ITR 886 (Del). Though the said questions were posed in the context of the provisions of the Indian IT Act, 1922, the relevant provisions under the present Act, are also similar.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the Revenue contended that the provisions of S. 38(2) of the Act were not considered in the earlier decision. We do not think so. The ratio of the earlier decision involves consideration of a similar question. The Bench pointed out that the lifts and air-conditioning plant are fitted in the Head Office of the assessee and the fact that the air conditioning plant and lifts may also be utilised by somebody who happened to be a tenant of one of the floors of the building would not make any difference. The same air-conditioning plant and lifts are likely to be used by the customers of the bank and any other visitor of the bank and this will happen practically in every case and no assessee can be said to be using the air conditioning plant or the lifts only by himself.