2005 (7) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeals under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are being disposed of by a common judgment. In both these appeals one common question of law involved is whether the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) disallowing extra shift allowance and additional depreciation on the assets leased out by the assessee? The assessee is a public limited c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ance on the assets leased out. Hence, the view of the Tribunal and other income-tax authorities, in our opinion, is not correct. However, it is urged by learned counsel for the Department that there is no finding of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal or the lower income-tax authorities that the lessee in fact had worked multiple shifts. We have carefully perused the order of the Tribunal, Commiss .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal has rejected the assessee's appeal following the decision reported in CIT v. Madras Wire Products [1979] 119 ITR 454 (Mad), which deals with sections 75 to 77 of the Income-tax Act. However, there is no mention of section 32A(7) therein. Since, that provision has not been looked into by the Tribunal or the lower authorities, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X