TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 136
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e JUDGMENT (PER HON'BLE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ, J.) This appeal is directed against the judgement of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur dated 5.12.2017, whereby the appeal of the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) dated 5.12.2017 was dismissed, thereby affirming the assessment order dated 3.2.2016. The appellant-assessee is a sole proprietorship firm engaged in the business of civil work ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng to Rs. 22,77,188 claimed by the assessee is hereby added to the total income of the assessee. Against the aforesaid assessment order dated 03.01.2016, the appellantassessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kota. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kota rejected the appeal vide its order dated 05.12.2017. Against the aforesaid order of the Commissioner o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red for higher rate of depreciation @ 30% under the provisions of Section 32 read with Rule 5 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 to be granted to the assessee irrespective of the fact that the trucks and dumpers were not being used in the business of running them on hire. Another argument of learned counsel for the appellant is that higher rate of depreciation of 40% on new commercial vehicles used in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ery by the Court, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that since these are arguments of law, they can be raised directly before this Court as the action of the respondents is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned order, we find that the two arguments, which the appellant has raised now on the b....