Commissioner of Income Tax, Agra vs Jandial Shoe Factory

Learned counsel for the assessee expired several years ago. If the assessee has not bothered about this case and has not tried or cared to contact this counsel for the past so many years, we do not think it necessary to waste further time in issuing notice of the assessee in this old reference of the year 1989. Two questions have been referred in this reference.

In the case Janta Sugar Industries v. CIT [2006] 150 Taxman 262 (All.), a Division Bench of this Court held that investment allowance u/s 32A cannot be refused for machinery on the ground that it has not been put to use during the year under consideration. We see no good reason to take a different view. The question No. 1, which; has been referred is answered accordingly.

In the same decision of Janta Sugar Industries''s case (supra), it has been held that depreciation on a generator is permissible @ 10%.

We do not find any good reason lo take a different view.

We therefore, answer the second question inferred by holding that the Tribunal was not correct in directing the assessing officer to allow depreciation on generator @ 20% and the rate should have been only 10%. Reference answered accordingly.