9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sanjay Bhowmick, Adv., Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. And Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. ORDER The Court : The marginal delay of about 56 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. GA No.3335 of 2016 is allowed accordingly. The appeal is taken up for consideration of two questions: i. Whether an Appellate Tribunal ought ordinarily to interfere with an order passed under Section 263 of the In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dmitted position that no report of the complaining income tax official from Mumbai was forwarded to the assessee nor was any statement that may have been obtained in course of the Mumbai investigation from any official of Duralloy furnished to the assessee. In response to the show-cause notice dated March 24, 2014, the assessee issued a prompt reply on March 28, 2014 disclosing voluminous documen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Ordinarily, an Appellate Tribunal has to be slow in receiving an appeal from an order passed under Section 263 of the Act if the order of the Commissioner is confined to requiring the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment. In other words, a distinction ought to be made between the two parts to Section 263 of the Act: the first part which permits the Commissioner to enhance or modify the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterference on such ground. The other ground pertains to the rate of depreciation that the assessee had claimed and the permissibility thereof. The Appellate Tribunal took into consideration the fact that depreciation at the enhanced rate had been permitted in at least one subsequent assessment year. Further, it was the case of the assessee that the assessee may not have let out its vehicles to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
