SULTAN SINGH ,MATHURA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1)(1) AGRA, AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 161/AGR/2022Status: DisposedITAT Agra11 February 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowance of higher depreciation by the Assessing Officer under section 154 was not a rectifiable issue as it involved subjective appreciation of facts. The case of T. S. Balaram ITO v. Volkart Bros was cited.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2015-16 was filed against an order by the CIT(A)-NFAC, arising from proceedings under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer invoked rectification jurisdiction to disallow the assessee's claim for higher depreciation.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of higher depreciation under section 154 rectification is permissible when it involves subjective appreciation of facts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 11.02.2025Pronounced: 11.02.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)-NFAC”],Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1044211729(1) dated 28.07.2022, involving proceedings under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing that learned Assessing Officer had invoked its section 154 rectification jurisdiction to disallow assessee’s claim of higher depreciation, which is not a rectifiable issue since involving subjective appreciation of the entire facts, in light of T. S.

Balaram ITO v. Volkart Bros (1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC). We, therefore, reverse the learned lower authorities’ impugned rectification process for this precise reason alone. All other pleadings are rendered academic.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 11TH February, 2025.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →