TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (5) TMI 399
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndent : Mr. F. V. Irani with Atul K. Jasani ORDER P. C. 1 Heard Mr.Suresh Kumar appearing on behalf of the revenue and Mr.Irani appearing on behalf of the assessee. 2 The two questions projected as substantial questions of law read as under : (a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in law, was justified in upholding the order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s to be treated as plants and machinery eligible for depreciation at the rate of 25% ? 3 As far as the question (a) above is concerned, in all fairness parties conceded that in the case of very assesssee the said question was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.1043 of 2010, decided on 12th September, 2011. The wording of the question for the relevant assessment....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....raise any question, leave aside, any substantial question of law. 5 As far as question (b) above is concerned, the Tribunal categorically held that, as a matter of fact the very issue was raised in the case of the assessee before us. That was raised in the assessment year 2005-2006 and a particular view was taken by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which was not questioned by the revenu....