1992 (8) TMI 37

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ne has to be taken into consideration in completing the assessment ? (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was not in error in concluding that the claim for depreciation in the original return is to be ignored when no claim is made in the revised return filed subsequently? (3) Whether the Appellate Tribunal was not in error in concluding that the claim for depreciation is a choice left to the assessee and cannot be allowed when not claimed in the revised return?" The assessee is a company carrying on manufacture of grinders. For the assessment years 1973-74 and 1975-76, the assessee filed revised returns whereby withdrew its claim regarding depreciation. The Income-tax Officer, however, allowed depreciation to the assessee as per details fu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ound on record. Learned counsel seeks to place emphasis upon the expression " shall " in the section. On the contrary, Sri K. P. Kumar, learned counsel for the assessee, submitted that the provisions of section 32 are clearly governed by section 34(1), as it stood at the relevant period, which reads thus: "S. 34. (1). The deductions referred to in sub-section (1) or subsection (1A) of section 32 shall be allowed only if the prescribed particulars have been furnished . . . " There cannot be any doubt that allowing of the deductions as provided under section 32 of the Act itself is subject to the provisions of section 34. Here, learned counsel for the assessee laid emphasis upon the requirement under sub-section (1) of section 34 to state t....