https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338076 The court upheld the Assessing Officer's decision to deny the appellant's depreciation claim on a Flameless Furnace due to the lack of crucial documents and failure to explain the whereabouts of the leased machinery. Despite submitting various documents, the appellant's failure to provide confirmation from the lessee led to the rejection of the claim. The court emphasized the evidentiary value of Section 133A statements and rejected the appellant's argument regarding the Director's statement. The delay in seeking cross-examination and the absence of vital documents supported the authorities' decision, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal without costs. en-us Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338076 The court upheld the Assessing Officer's decision to deny the appellant's depreciation claim on a Flameless Furnace due to the lack of crucial documents and failure to explain the whereabouts of the leased machinery. Despite submitting various documents, the appellant's failure to provide confirmation from the lessee led to the rejection of the claim. The court emphasized the evidentiary value of Section 133A statements and rejected the appellant's argument regarding the Director's statement. The delay in seeking cross-examination and the absence of vital documents supported the authorities' decision, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338076