2018 (9) TMI 716

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or The Respondent : Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sanjay Bhowmick, Adv., Mr. Siddharth Das, Adv. And Ms. Swapna Das, Adv. ORDER The Court : The marginal delay of about 56 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. GA No.3335 of 2016 is allowed accordingly. The appeal is taken up for consideration of two questions: i. Whether an Appellate Tribunal ought ordinarily to interfere ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is the admitted position that no report of the complaining income tax official from Mumbai was forwarded to the assessee nor was any statement that may have been obtained in course of the Mumbai investigation from any official of Duralloy furnished to the assessee. In response to the show-cause notice dated March 24, 2014, the assessee issued a p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the relevant assessment year were not bogus or fraudulent. Ordinarily, an Appellate Tribunal has to be slow in receiving an appeal from an order passed under Section 263 of the Act if the order of the Commissioner is confined to requiring the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment. In other words, a distinction ought to be made between the two parts to Section 263 of the Act: the fir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sactions were genuine, the order impugned does not call for any interference on such ground. The other ground pertains to the rate of depreciation that the assessee had claimed and the permissibility thereof. The Appellate Tribunal took into consideration the fact that depreciation at the enhanced rate had been permitted in at least one subsequent assessment year. Further, it was the case of th....