CIT Vs. DEVIDAYAL ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Sri A.N. Mahajan learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Piyush Agarwal learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) ADDITIONAL depreciation of Rs. 33,899 on the cost of computer was allowed to the assessee by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. Subsequently he by order dated 9 -3 -1989 rectified the mistake under section 154 of the Income Tax Act on the ground that the mistake was apparent from the record and withdrew the investment allowance and depreciation on care and computer. This order was challenged by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income Tax who allowed the appeal on 17 -6 -1991. The department filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal that had been dismissed on 26 -7 -1996. This Income -tax application has been filed under section 256(2) of the Act.

(3.) THE application is accordingly rejected.