COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SAHADEVAN M S

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these cases, the common question is whether the offset press is "other electrical machinery" within the meaning of the relevant entry in the Schedule to the I.T. Act under which separate rates of depreciation are set out for distinct categories of machinery.

(2.) WE shall first take T.C. No. 189 of 1976. The assessee is carrying on the business of running a calendar press, printing press, offset printing press, etc. He claimed depreciation at the rate of 10% for the assessment year 1966-67. The ITO was of the view that the correct depreciation allowable under the rules was only 7%. He, therefore, worked out the depreciation accordingly and granted it. On appeal, the AAC accepted the assessee's contention that the entire machinery was run under electric power and that it should be considered as electrical machinery within the scope of r. 5 of the I.T. Rules read with App. I to the Rules. The ITO appealed to the Tribunal, which found that the machines were offset printing machines used in litho works and that the proper rate of depreciation would be 10 per cent. The question referred as arising out of this order of the Tribunal runs as follows :

(3.) THE question now for our consideration is the meaning to be assigned to words "electrical machinery". THE learned counsel for the Commissioner contended that "electrical machinery" should only be taken to mean "machinery producing, transmitting for storing electricity". We are unable to agree with this submission because electric supply undertakings have been separately dealt with under the main entry (2) under the alphabetical head "E". No purpose is served by repeating the same machinery in another heading. THErefore, item (b) above referring to "other electrical machinery" must necessarily be some other machinery than machinery used in electric supply undertakings.