R.K. Gulati, J. - (1.) This is an application under Sub-section (2) of Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Kanpur. The question proposed in the application reads as under : "Whether in law and on the facts of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) decision holding that the assessee-company was engaged in the business of manufacturing artificial silk and was, therefore, entitled to depreciation at the rate of 15 per cent. as against 10 per cent. allowed by the Assessing Officer ?"
(2.) The assessee-company claimed depreciation on artificial silk manufacturing machinery at the rate of 15 per cent. which was not allowed by the Assessing Officer. He, however, allowed depreciation at the rate of 10 per cent. only. In appeal, both the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the claim of the assessee before the appellate authority as the assessee filed a number of evidence to substantiate its claim, namely, that what it was manufacturing was artificial silk. The assessee also relied upon the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Syntex Fabrics Ltd.
(3.) The case of Syntex Fabrics Ltd. came to be considered by this court in I. T. R. No. 12 of 1978. Addl. CIT v. Syntex Fabrics Ltd. [1991] 191 ITR 52, which was decided by a Division Bench of this court by its order dated November 19, 1990. This court answered the question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The question now proposed before us contains a similar controversy as in the case of Syntex Fabrics Ltd., which already stands answered by the decision aforesaid. In this view of the matter, we feel that no statable question of law arises on which a direction could be issued to the Tribunal for making a reference to this court.;