- (1.) BY way of this appeal, the appellantrevenue has challenged the order dated 23.01.2001 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad [for short "the Tribunal"] in ITA No. 6030/Ahd/1994, whereby the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed by the Tribunal.
(2.) THE short facts of this case are that on 13.10.1969, the respondentassessee had purchased one immovable property in the form of a godown at Bombay for an amount of Rs.1,22,767/. Depreciation on this property was claimed upto Assessment Year 198485. Thereafter, with effect from Assessment Year 1985 -86 onwards the assessee neither claimed any depreciation nor any such claim was allowed by the revenue in respect of the said property. The contention of the assessee was that the said property had not been used for the purpose of business with effect from Assessment Year 1985 -86 and therefore, the provisions of Section 50 would not be applicable since the property was not included in the block of assets. The assessing Officer, however, rejected the contention and held that the case was covered by section 50 of the Act and as such the capital gain and no deduction under Section 54E could be granted. 2.1. Against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The CIT(A) partly allowed the said appeal. Being aggrieved by the same, the revenue has filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, vide its order dated 23.01.2001 dismissed the said appeal. Hence, this appeal is filed at the instance of the revenue.
(3.) WHILE admitting this appeal on 17.09.2001 this Court had formulated the following substantial question of law: " Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law and on facts in confirming the order of the CIT(Appeals) and thereby holding that the case of the assessee was not covered by Section 50 of the Act and the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under Section 54E which is admissible only in respect of the longterm capital gain - Learned advocate for the appellantrevenue has submitted that the Tribunal has committed error in confirming the order of the CIT(A) and holding that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under Section 54E of the Income Tax Act. He further submitted that the Tribunal has not properly appreciated the material available on record, therefore, he urged to allow this appeal.;