Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (10) TMI 788 - HC - Income TaxClaim of depreciation on installation of windmill Satisfaction of requirement of second proviso to Rule 5(1A) of the Income Tax Rules or not Held that:- Following the decision in CIT V. Vijaya Hirasa Kalamkar (HUF) [1992 (9) TMI 4 - BOMBAY High Court] - if the assessee exercised the option in terms of second proviso to Rule 5(1A) of the Income Tax Rules at the time of furnishing of return of income, it will suffice and no separate letter or request or intimation with regard to of exercise of option is required - Since the returns are filed in accordance with Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act and the form prescribed therein make a provision for exercising an option in respect of the claim of depreciation, no separate procedure is required Decided against revenue. Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 Held that:- The Tribunal rightly upheld the order of the CIT(A) that the assessee was able to produce documents and the details of repayment made through cheque - assessee had also furnished identity of persons with complete details of addresses and the FD applications showing details thus, the order of the Tribunal is upheld Decided against revenue.
|