2012 (6) TMI 790

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....epreciation under section 32 on plant and machinery relating to toilet soap unit, which were not put to use during the year? [2] Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that if interest under section 234B is not levied specifically in the assessment order, the same cannot be charged in the demand notice?" 2. The appeal involves assessment year 1991-92. The respondent - assessee had claimed depreciation on plant and machinery installed in its toilet soap unit. The Assessing Officer on the premise that such plant and machinery was not put to use during the year under consideration, disallowed the assessee's claim of depreciation relatable to such plant and machinery. The assessee carried the matter in app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... hold that the disallowance of depreciation is uncalled for. Accordingly, we reverse the orders of the authorities below on this point. Reliance in this connection is also placed on the decision of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Khimji Vishram and Sons v. CIT, 209 ITR 293 (Guj) which has been relied on by the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench "C" in the case of the very same assessee while disposing of the appeal for the A.Y. 1988-89 on a similar issue in ITA Nos.5218 and 5503/Ahd/91 and C.O. No.814/Ahd/95 dated 3.3.1999." 3. First question formulated by this Court pertains to this conclusion of the Tribunal. Having heard the counsel for the parties, we notice that the view of the Tribunal is fortified by the decision of Division Bench of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....estion No.2 pertains to demand of interest under section 234B of the Act when the same was not levied in the assessment order itself. The assessee contended that when there was no direction for collecting interest under any of the provisions in the assessment order itself, any demand for such interest thereafter would not be valid. The Tribunal upheld the contention of the assessee observing that in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer had not passed any specific order relating to interest. In fact, the order of assessment was silent about the charging interest under any section. The Tribunal relying on the decision of the Patna High Court in case of Uday Mistanna Bhandar & Co. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in 137 CTR 376, ....