https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68984 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, affirming the validity of the revised return filed by the assessee under Section 139(5) of the Income-tax Act. It ruled that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) cannot allow depreciation if the prescribed particulars are not furnished, in line with the legislative intent and CBDT Circular No. 29-D (XIX-14). The Tribunal emphasized that the ITO must adhere to the CBDT's instructions, and the assessee has the discretion to claim or not claim depreciation, ensuring fair application of statutory provisions. en-us Fri, 25 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:46:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68984 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, affirming the validity of the revised return filed by the assessee under Section 139(5) of the Income-tax Act. It ruled that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) cannot allow depreciation if the prescribed particulars are not furnished, in line with the legislative intent and CBDT Circular No. 29-D (XIX-14). The Tribunal emphasized that the ITO must adhere to the CBDT's instructions, and the assessee has the discretion to claim or not claim depreciation, ensuring fair application of statutory provisions. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 May 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68984