Law:

Section:

Section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Advance tax - Interest payable by Government - Whether/ interest on advance tax refundable to assessee should be on amount of refund resulting from original assessment instead/of amount ensuing from AAC's order - Held, yes Section 32 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 5 of the Income-Tax Rules, 1962 - Depreciation - Allowance/Rate of - Whether motor van-is entitled to higher depreciation rate than motor car, in view of former having engine of greater horse-power, more axle weight and exigible to more tax as compared to latter and, therefore, Tribunal was justified in granting depreciation at 30 per cent for motor vans to assessee instead of 20 per cent as provided in rule 5 for motor cars - Held, yes FACTS Refund of advance tax was allowed to the assessee. A question arose as to whether interest should be given on the amount of advance tax refund resulting from the original assessment order or ensuing from the order of the AAC. The Tribunal held that the said interest should be given on the refundable amount as ordered by the AAC. Rule 5 provided for 20 per cent depreciation on motor cars. The assessee owned motor vans and claimed depreciation at a higher rate, on the ground that a van could not be equated with a motor car, inasmuch as the former had an engine of greater horse-power, more axle weight and higher tax was paid thereon. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's contention and allowed depreciation at 30 per cent. On reference: HELD Following the Full Bench decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Carona Sahu Co. Ltd. [1984] 146 ITR 452/16 Taxman 32, interest was to be given on advance tax refund resulting from the original assessment order and not that ensuing from the order of the AAC. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's contention that depreciation upon motor van should be allowed at the rate of 30 per cent and not at the rate of 20 per cent which is applicable to a motor car. It was difficult to see how that conclusion of the Tribunal could be faulted. The Tribunal was right in allowing depreciation at 30 per cent. CASE REVIEW CIT v. Carona Sahu Co. Ltd.[1984] 146 ITR 452 (Bom) [FB] followed and…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492