METAL TUBE AND ROLLING MILLS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 24(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee's appeals no

depreciation on lorry & tempo to the\nextent of Rs. 15,074/-, ( Total of Rs. 1,63,692/-), which was\ndeleted by learned CIT(A).\n(v) Learned assessing officer further treated interest of Rs.\n5,26,497/- received on FDR and interest of Rs. 5,03,918/-\nreceived on loans and advances as income from other sources\nand not part

ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI vs. GTL LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

depreciation Can be apportioned over non STP units and not on the STP units as these assets did not form part of the fixed assets of the STP Units. The action of the AO in apportioning even the deprecation cost over the STP Units is therefore absolutely unwarranted. In the light of the above, it is apparent that apportioning

METAL TUBE AND ROLLING MILLS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX 24(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee's appeals no

depreciation on lorry & tempo to the\nextent of Rs. 15,074/-, ( Total of Rs. 1,63,692/-), which was\ndeleted by learned CIT(A).\n(v) Learned assessing officer further treated interest of Rs.\n5,26,497/- received on FDR and interest of Rs. 5,03,918/-\nreceived on loans and advances as income from other sources\nand not part

METAL TUBE AND ROLLING MILSS,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 24(2)(1), MIUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeals no

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

sections, etc. Assessee firm e-filed its return of income for A.Y. 2010-11 on 27.09.2010, declaring total income at Rs. Nil. The return was processed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. After considering