https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206277 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, granting relief by applying amendments to Section 40(a)(ia) retrospectively from 1.4.2005. The disallowances of excess claim of depreciation and ad hoc disallowance of tyre expenses were upheld due to lack of challenge or evidence. The initiation of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was dismissed as no appeal lies against its mere initiation. The levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C was mandatory, and the application of Section 234D from AY 2004-05 onward was affirmed, rejecting the ground for earlier years. en-us Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Jul 2011 10:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206277 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, granting relief by applying amendments to Section 40(a)(ia) retrospectively from 1.4.2005. The disallowances of excess claim of depreciation and ad hoc disallowance of tyre expenses were upheld due to lack of challenge or evidence. The initiation of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was dismissed as no appeal lies against its mere initiation. The levy of interest under Sections 234B and 234C was mandatory, and the application of Section 234D from AY 2004-05 onward was affirmed, rejecting the ground for earlier years. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206277