1999 (5) TMI 49

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for asst. yr. 1990-91. 2. The issue in this case is somewhat interesting. The assessee-company did not desire to claim depreciation for this year and hence it had not filed any working of the depreciation along with return of income. On the other hand, the AO while doing the assessment allowed the depreciation. The CIT(A) allowed the assessee's appeal by directing the AO not to allow depreciation....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) 154 ITR 148 (SC) is support of the Revenue's argument in this connection. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee placed a strong reliance on the decision of the Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Arun Textiles (1991) 98 CTR (Guj) 117 : (1991) 192 ITR 700 (Guj), which was also cited before the AO and the CIT(A). He challenged the findings of the AO that the judgment relied on by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bmissions and the evidence on record. We find that the assessee did not opt to claim depreciation for this year on the strength of the Gujarat High Court's decision in the case of CIT vs. Arun Textiles. The CIT(A) has carefully considered the judgment in the above case. He has also referred to another decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Chief CIT vs. Machine Tools Corporation (1992....