https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768214 ITAT Chandigarh allowed the assessee's appeal partly in a depreciation and bonus payment dispute. The tribunal found CIT(A) erred by not considering the correct depreciation figure of Rs. 89,96,72,987 from the Tax Audit Report, instead relying on the incorrect ITR figure of Rs. 1,03,13,420 filed inadvertently. The CIT(A)'s order on depreciation was set aside. Regarding bonus payment under section 43B, the tribunal remanded the matter back to CIT(A) for proper adjudication with a speaking order, as the lower authority failed to address this issue adequately. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Apr 2025 10:56:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768214 ITAT Chandigarh allowed the assessee's appeal partly in a depreciation and bonus payment dispute. The tribunal found CIT(A) erred by not considering the correct depreciation figure of Rs. 89,96,72,987 from the Tax Audit Report, instead relying on the incorrect ITR figure of Rs. 1,03,13,420 filed inadvertently. The CIT(A)'s order on depreciation was set aside. Regarding bonus payment under section 43B, the tribunal remanded the matter back to CIT(A) for proper adjudication with a speaking order, as the lower authority failed to address this issue adequately. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768214