2001 (7) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gally declined deduction on account of depredation on the value of the truck purchased by it on March 11, 1992. It claims that the case raises a substantial question of law and the orders passed by the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal be set aside. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1992-93. On March 11, 1992, the assesse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the authorities have recorded a finding of fact that the amount of Rs.2 lakhs had come back to the assessee within a week of its purchasing the truck and that the truck had gone back to the family of the seller after some time. Thus, it was a device to save tax. It has also been contended that the present appellant, viz., Mittal Belting and Machinery Stores, had not filed any appeal before the Com .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ant and the income therefrom, i.e., Rs.2,200 were added to its income. Thus, the benefit of depreciation could not have been denied. We are unable to accept this contention. If on -the examination of the evidence it is found that there was no genuine transaction between the parties, a pure paper transaction could not have entitled the assessee to claim benefit under the law. There is no error whic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X