D S SRINIVAS Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in this petition is challenging an order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, annexure G, dated March 12,1999.

(2.) THE petitioner-assessee filed his return for the assessment year 1994-95 declaring the income at Rs. 41,550. He claimed depreciation on motor vehicle in terms of Section 32(1) of the Act. It was accepted. Even in the regular assessment after verification of the books of account, statement and other particulars filed by the petitioner, the claim was allowed in terms of the order dated April 17, 1995. THEreafter a notice under Section 154 was issued by the first respondent proposing to rectify the assessment made under Section 143(3) of the Act in respect of depreciation. Objections were filed. THEreafter an order was passed withdrawing the depreciation granted to the petitioner. A representation was filed and the petitioner was unsuccessful in filing the representation. An order in terms of annexure G was passed. Annexure G is challenged in this petition.

(3.) SECTION 154 provides for rectification of mistakes committed by an officer in terms of the Act. Material facts in this case would show that depreciation was accepted in terms of annexure A. Thereafter a printed notice was issued and in the printed notice it was stated that excess depreciation is withdrawn. The petitioner filed objections stating therein that the respondent is to refrain from making any allowance in regard to depreciation claimed by the petitioner. Thereafter a notice was issued in terms of annexure D stating therein that the petitioner being a hirer is not liable to claim depreciation. The Income-tax Officer thereafter passed an adverse order on the ground that there were mistakes apparent from the records. The revisional authority accepted the said finding. Let me see as to whether the discretion exercised by the respondent is correct or not in the given set of facts.