TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 880
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refore, the film equipments which were installed on the vehicle is not entitled for higher depreciation. Referring to the assessment order, the Ld. representative submitted that even though the Assessing Officer disallowed a sum of Rs. 2,78,641/- towards depreciation with regard to variation in the opening Written Down Value on plant and machinery, he allowed the entire claim of the assessee at the rate of 40% in respect of the vehicle along with film equipments. Therefore, the CIT ought not have exercised his power under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"). Placing reliance on the order of the CIT(Appeals) for assessment year 1996-97, a copy of which is available at Annexure 1 of written submission, the Ld. representative submitted that for the assessment year 1996-97, a similar depreciation was allowed in respect of film equipments, which was installed on the vehicle. Even for assessment year 1990-91, in the assessee's own case, the Assessing Officer himself allowed the claim of the assessee in a proceeding under Section 154 of the Act, a copy of which is available at Annexure 2 of written submission. Placing reliance on the judgement of Apex Court in Mal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt in Malabar Industrial Company Ltd. (supra). Referring to the orders of the CIT(Appeals) for assessment year 1996-97 and the Assessing Officer for assessment year 1990- 91, the Ld. D.R. submitted that each assessment year is separate and distinct. The Assessing Officer found that there was a variance in the plant and machinery. Therefore, it is not known whether the same asset was continued for the year under consideration. 5. Referring to the order of the Commissioner, the Ld. D.R. submitted that the Commissioner directed the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment de novo after conducting enquiries on the vital aspects. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the assessee cannot have any grievance on the direction of the Commissioner. 6. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The Assessing Officer has not discussed anything in the assessment order about the depreciation for vehicle and generator said to be installed on the vehicle. Admittedly, the assessee let out the vehicle along with the generator installed on the vehicle. Therefore, the question arises for consideration is - when the assessee let ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT v. Sunil Kumar Goel [2005] 274 ITR 53, the High Court, after considering the judgment of the Constitutional Bench of the Apex Court in S.N.Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984, has observed as follows: " In S.N.Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court discussed the development of law on this subject in India, Australia, Canada, England and the United States of America and after making reference to a large number of judicial precedents, their Lordships culled out the following propositions (page 1995) : "The decisions of this court referred to above indicate that with regard to the requirement to record reasons the approach of this court is more in line with that of the American Courts. An important consideration which has weighed with the court for holding that an administrative authority exercising quasijudicial functions must record the reasons for its decision, is that such a decision is subject to the appellate jurisdiction of this court under article 136 of the Constitution as well as the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Courts under article 227 of the Constitution and that the reasons, if recorded, wo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s such an order, need not give separate reasons if the appellate or revisional authority agrees with the reasons contained in the order under challenge." In Testeels Ltd. v. N. M. Desai [1970] 37 FJR 7; AIR 1970 Guj 1, a Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court has made an extremely lucid enunciation of law on the subject and we can do no better than to extract some of the observations made in that decision. The same are (headnote of AIR 1970 (Guj): "The necessity of giving reasons flows as a necessary corollary from the rule of law which constitutes one of the basic principles of the Indian Constitutional set-up. The administrative authorities having a duty to act judicially cannot therefore decide on considerations of policy or expediency. They must decide the matter solely on the facts of the particular case, solely on the material before them and apart from any extraneous considerations by applying pre-existing legal norms to factual situations. Now the necessity of giving reasons is an important safeguard to ensure observance of the duty to act judicially. It introduces clarity, checks the introduction of extraneous or irrelevant considerations and excludes or, at any ....