During the period relevant to the assessment year 2010 -11 , the assessee sold a piece of land and offered the consideration to long term capital gain. During the survey operation , the AO recorded a statement  of the representative of the assessee company indicating that there was a factory building situated on the land . The revenue therefore contended that such building would be subject to depreciation and for the purpose of charging capital gain the depreciated value of the super structure should be taken in to consideration . The statement was promptly retracted . On appeal the Tribunal held that there was no super structure on the land which could be subjected to depreciation . Considering the records the Tribunal held that the provision of S.50 cannot be applicable to the facts of the appellant . On appeal by the revenue   ,dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that the Tribunal is justified in holding that there did not exist any building on the sold property especially in view of the fact the specification in agreement of sale and incriminating material found in survey confirmed existence of super structure on sold property. (Arising out of ITA. No.6224/Mum/2012 dt.22/01/2016)(ITA NO. 124 of 2017, dt.12/03/2019) (AY. 2010-11)