IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.128 of 2000 Date of decision: 18.11.2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax. -----Appellant. Vs. M/s Jalandhar Mill Stores. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Vivek Sethi, Standing Counsel for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar dated 21.2.2000 in I.T.A. No.486(ASR)/1994 for the assessment year 1992-93 proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Tribunal was right in law in allowing depreciation on gas cylinders ignoring that trading in gas was not the business of the assessee for the asstt. year 1992-93?” 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT was right in law in dismissing the appeal of the Revenue whereby affirming the action I.T.A. No.128 of 2000 of the Ld. CIT(A) holding that the assessee’s case is covered by Ist Proviso to sec.32(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and as such, 4th Proviso thereto is not applicable in respect of the case falling under the Ist proviso thereto?” Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that the matter is covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated 27.9.2007 in I.T.A. No.141 of 1996 CIT v. Suresh Sehgal Prop.M/s Sehgal Gas Supply Company. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE November 18, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) ashwani JUDGE 2