Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

had claimed higher depreciation. There was no concealment involved nor this is a case of filing of inaccurate particulars as everything was disclosed in the deprecation chart attached with the Income-tax Return. Furthermore, this case is also not covered under Zoom Communication, Delhi High Court, as in this case, the scrutiny u/s 143(3) was done and not simple processing u/s 143(1), as the income returned in this case is Rs.4.72 crores. Similarly with regard to subsidy of Rs. 25,50,000/-, the assessee had also claimed depreciation. There was no concealment nor a case of furnishing inaccurate particulars. This case is covered by case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Produdcted Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158 and CIT Vs. Brahmputra Consortium Ltd. (Delhi High Court) ITA 1582 OF 2010 wherein it is held that:-