1990 (8) TMI 42

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... questions referred read as follows : "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal Was justified in law in holding that depreciation on concrete poles is to be allowed at 10% in the assessment years 1977-78 to 1982-83 in terms of Appendix I of Part I of rule 5 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holdin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... epreciation at the rate of 30%". On further appeal, the order of the Income-tax Officer was restored by the Tribunal. The reasoning of the Tribunal was that in Appendix 1, there is no specific provision for depreciation on moulds of the instant case and, therefore, under the residuary provision, ten per cent. depreciation only can be accorded. Hence, the reference. Learned counsel for the assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ." In the numerous clauses of Appendix 1, unless a specific clause is attracted in other cases, depreciation of ten per cent. is to be allowed is not disputed. In commercial parlance, pipes are far different from poles, and therefore, sub-clause (2) has no application as that clause deals with moulds which are used for pipes and, therefore, that clause is not attracted for the poles. By the same .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X