9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1657X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal, Mumbai ("the Tribunal" for short) dated 12.4.2016. 2. Following questions are presented for our consideration:- "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in directing the Assessing Officer to delete the addition on account of excess depreciation claimed by the assessee? (ii) Whether on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded that the learned counsel for the Revenue haS instructions not to press this ground. This question is, therefore, not considered. 4. In so far as question Nos. (ii) and (iii) are concerned, the same were considered in case of this very assessee in Income Tax Appeal No. 1132 of 2014. By an order dated 4.1.2017 while disposing of the Revenue's appeal, the Court made following observations: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l No.10666 of 2013 (CIT v/s. M/s. Shree Balaji Alloys) rendered on 19th April, 2016. Thus the test has been correctly applied by the Tribunal in accordance with the above decisions. (c) In the above view, question no.(i) as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus not entertained. 4. Regarding question no. (ii):- (a) The issue raised in this question is consequent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been duly audited. The book profits as reflected in the duly audited account have to be accepted by the Assessing Officer and the only limited power he has to increase/ decrease the book profit as arrived at by the assessee is only in terms of the Explanation to Section 115J of the Act. In the present case, the Revenue is not invoking the explanation to Section 115J of the Act to vary the boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
