2015 (4) TMI 1287

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated 15/06/2012 passed by the learned CIT(A)-II, Jaipur for A.Y. 2008-09. The sole ground of appeal is as under:- "(i) Deleting penalty of Rs. 20,51,508/-imposed by the A.O. U/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the assessee has deliberately claimed wrong depreciation at higher rate not only in the year ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The assessee was asked to explain the admissibility of above depreciation as per the Act. In response thereof, the AR of the assessee vide its letter dated 28/12/2010 has replied, which has been reproduced at page No. 2 of the assessment order. After considering the assessee's reply he held that the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory and it is established that the assessee ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion, the assessee company revised its claim of depreciation to 15% on the crockery, cutlery, blankets, linen and dresses and @ 10% on furnishing and decorations. It is seen that the assessee had disclosed all material facts pertaining to the claim of depreciation admissible U/s 32 of the Act. There was no deliberate attempt on the part of the assessee to conceal the particulars of the income or f....