TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 558
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e V. M. Sahai) 1.0 We have heard Mr. M. R. Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for Mrs. Mauna Bhatt, learned counsel for Revenue and Mr.S. N. Soparkar, learned senior counsel for Mrs. Swati Soparkar, learned counsel for the respondent. 2.0 The Revenue has proposed the following question. "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer not to in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s under: " 6. Coming to ground No.2, the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No.404/Ahd/2002 and others for Assessment Year 199798 and others held as under: "5. Having heard both sides, we have carefully gone through the impugned orders of the authorities below. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the case of Apollo Tyres Limited 255 ITR 273 (SC) is squarely ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wance of depreciation. In the case of CIT vs. Rubamin P. Ltd., Hon'ble Gujarat High Court following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres vs. CIT (255 ITR 273) held that for the purpose of section 115J of the Act, only those adjustments, which are specified in the explanation to section 115J can be made from the book profits and depreciation not being one of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue is rejected." 4.0 A Division Bench of this Court in Tax Appeal No.109 of 2010, decided on 13.12.2011, has held in para:10 that the Assessing Officer could not have varied the Profit and Loss Account of the company duly audited and prepared in terms of the provisions contained in the Companies Act which is extracted as under: "10. In that view of the matter, as rightly pointed out by the couns....