https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55357 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, holding that the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) was not justified in directing the Assessing Officer (AO) to impose depreciation on the assessee, emphasizing the implicit option for the assessee to claim or forgo depreciation. The Tribunal upheld the CIT's authority on other issues, including the verification of deduction claims under section 35D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision clarified the statutory benefit of depreciation and the necessity for furnishing particulars, ruling that the CIT's exercise of revisionary power on the depreciation issue was without jurisdiction. en-us Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Nov 2010 18:48:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55357 The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, holding that the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) was not justified in directing the Assessing Officer (AO) to impose depreciation on the assessee, emphasizing the implicit option for the assessee to claim or forgo depreciation. The Tribunal upheld the CIT's authority on other issues, including the verification of deduction claims under section 35D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision clarified the statutory benefit of depreciation and the necessity for furnishing particulars, ruling that the CIT's exercise of revisionary power on the depreciation issue was without jurisdiction. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55357