1985 (1) TMI 128

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nsideration the assessee claimed full depreciation on the building and machinery as per the last record. The ITO, however, deducted the amount of subsidy received by the assessee from the Director of Industries, Chandigarh from the value of the written down value by resorting to s. 43(1) of the IT Act, 1961 on the reasoning that portion of the cost to the extent of subsidy received has not been me .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion of the AAC is contrary to the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the case of M/s Lucknow Products Cooperative Milk Union Ltd. vs. CIT (1983) 34 CTR (All) 81. On the other hand, Shri V. S. Jain, ld. counsel of the assessee supported the order of the AAC. According to him the subsidy received by the assessee in the instant case is not relatable to any particular assets of the assessee firm. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vestment made by the assessee. On the above facts we agree with the AAC that the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal referred to above fully covers the issue and the assessee is not bound to deduct the subsidy amount from the written down value of the capital assets. The decision of the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of M/s Lucknow Producers Cooperative Milk Union Ltd. is no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X