Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

134, as well as 46 taxmann 88 of Hon'ble Mumbai High Court deleted the addition made by the AO.

15. The Ld.AR of the assesse invited our attention to the impugned order of the tribunal and requested for similar relief. The Ld.DR vehemently argued in favour of the order of Ld.AO and placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Dinamalar cited at 389 ITR 0094.

16. We have heard rival submission in the light of facts of the case and material brought on records. In this regard we find that the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Dinamalar cited at 389 ITR 0094 is squarely applicable in the present case on account of its peculiar facts discussed by the AO in his order. The ratio decendi in the case is that when the machines for which depreciation was sought for, did not fall under definition of "Computer" including computer software than enhanced depreciation cannot be granted.