2001 (7) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs.55,271 confirmed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on account of alleged job charges paid to Sh. Sandeep Jain, son of the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation of Rs.51,238 holding that the machinery purchased on March 31, 1988, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lleged job charges paid to Sh. Sandeep Jain, son of the assessee? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation of Rs.51,238 holding that the machinery purchased on March 31, 1988, from Ashoka Brothers Impex Ltd. for Rs.1,65,984 was put to use on the same day at Ludhiana?" Learned counsel for the parties .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s basis, a depreciation of Rs.51,328 has been wrongly allowed. On a perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal, we find that the machinery was purchased from Ashoka Brothers Impex Ltd., New Delhi. A certificate from the company was produced. It was certified that the mechanic had successfully installed the machine and put it into operation. He has stayed at the factory premises for eight hours .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X