Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Does not the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal violate the principles of natural justice, when it has not afforded an opportunity to this appellant to rebut fresh evidence, especially when the said evidence based on 'google study' is the reason for dismissing the appeal of the appellant?

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 32 & 255 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Depreciation - The Assessee company is carrying on the business of building products like asbestos etc., and it filed its return of income for the Assessment Year in question and the same was processed under section 143[1] of the IIT Act. It was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143[2] of the IT Act was issued. The issue only pertains to the claim of depreciation with regard to machineries used by the appellant/assessee Company for Pollution Control Measures. The appellant/assessee produced the Certificate of the Chartered Engineer before the AO to claim depreciation of cent percent on the ground that the machineries used, are under operation for Pollution Control measures. The AO disallowed the claim of cent percent and 80% claim of depreciation and restricted to the level of ordinary claim of 15% for the first quarter as allowed under the Income-tax Act and allowed the depreciation to the extent of 20%. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. ITAT also affirmed the order of AO by placing reliance upon the Google study in order to have an idea about the air pollution control equipments. Admittedly, the research done by ITAT in the form of Google study was not put either to the appellant/assessee Company or to the said Revenue. Thus, High Court remanded the appeal for fresh adjudication. Ramco industries ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT [2020] 426 ITR 388 (MAD)