Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: draft charges in Avtec Limited vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax on 30 May, 2017Matching Fragments
18. Mr. Manchanda stated that he was not aware whether in AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 the claim for depreciation had been allowed. In any event according to him the rule of consistency required the AO to follow what was done for AYs 2006-07 and 2007-08. On merits he submitted that there was no question of allowing such a claim for depreciation in terms of Section 35D of the Act which placed restrictions. Expenses like professional legal charges and contract drafting charges etc. could not be capitalised with capital assets like plant and machinery and this was not eligible for depreciation.