2005 (3) TMI 721

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed January 23, 2004, relating to the assessment year 1990-91. The only contention raised by counsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal was not right in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), whereby the investment allowance on the amount of Rs. 2,83,53,123 capitalised under the head Plant and machinery has been allowed. The assessee had claimed investment allowa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tment allowance. Accordingly, the claim of investment allowance was disallowed to that extent. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Incometax (Appeals) (for short the CIT(A) ), who observed that since the Assessing Officer had himself treated the said amount of Rs. 2,83,53,123 towards the cost of machinery for the purpose of allowance of depreciation, he could not be allo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X