TMI Blog1979 (11) TMI 136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lied to customers is an admissible deduction. 2. We heard the parties. We find that this issue is now covered by the latest decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT, Tamil Nadu-1, vs. Karuppuswamy Nadar Sons 120 ITR 140 in favour of the assessee. Respectfully following the above decision, we uphold the above order of the AAC on this point. 3. The next contention raised by the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at this issue is also covered against the Department by the order of the Tribunal referred to above for the asst. yr. 1973-74. For the reasons mentioned therein, with which we are in agreement, we uphold the order of the AAC. 7. The last point that is raised in this appeal is that the AAC erred in allowing as a deduction 100 per cent of the cost of partitioning with fencing incurred by the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was only given as an example in the schedule and that, therefore, the assessee was entitled to depreciation at the rate of 100 per cent. In appendix I, part I of the Depreciation Schedule, item 4 reads as follows: "Purely temporary erections such as wooden structures..............100 per cent. It is common ground that in this case, the assessee has put partition work in between two sections in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
