INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 260A

Appeal (High Court) - Substantial question of law - Validity and scope of remand order of Tribunal -

Assessee filed appeal against remand order of Tribunal as to whether the assets in question were being used by assessee in relevant years for regular business activity of the assessee was not coming out from orders of authorities below. Held: Tribunal agreed with the contentions urged on behalf of the assessee that if no income is earned from the use of assets during the relevant year for regular business activity of the assessee, then claiming of depreciation was justified. Therefore, the order of CIT(A) to that extent was upheld by the Tribunal also. Tribunal in impugned order remitted the matter back to CIT(A) to inquire into the question as to whether the assets were put to use in the relevant year before adding the block of assets or not, is a relevant factor to be established by the assessee and thereafter CIT(A) was required to pass a speaking order. There was sufficient force in the arguments of the Revenue in regard to such a finding recorded, especially in view of the order passed in I.C.D.S. Ltd..[ [2013] 29 taxmann.com 129 (SC) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 414 (SC)] . Thus, substantial questions of law framed against validity and scope of remand order of ITAT were answered against the assessee and in favour of revenue.

Followed:I.C.D.S. Ltd.. (2013) 29 Taxmann.com 129 (SC) : 2013 TaxPub(DT) 414 (SC)].

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Against the assessee.

A.Y. : 2011-12 & 2012-13

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT