HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Dated 6-7-2010. R.C.No.109 of 1997 Between: Commissioner of Income Tax, A.P-I, Hyderabad. …Applicant. And: Sayeeda Banu, Hyderabad. ...Respondent. HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN R.C.No.109 of 1997 ORDER: (Per the Honourable Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard both sides. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the question which has been referred to this Court whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was correct in law, in treating the poultry sheds and borewells as ‘Plant’ for the purpose of depreciation, is squarely covered by the principles laid down by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX v. VENKATESWARA HATCHERIES (P) Ltd., ([1]). Following the same, the question is answered in favour of the revenue. _____________________________ JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO ___________________________________ JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN Dated 6-7-2010. Dvs HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN R.C.No.109 of 1997 (Order delivered by the Honourable Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Dated 6-7-2010. [1] 1 (1999) 237 ITR 174