- (1.) INSTANT appeal filed under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 is directed against the judgment dt. 19th Dec, 2006 rendered in ITA Nos. 363 and 370/Jd/2001 (for the asst. yr. 1998 -99), by the Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench by which the appeal filed by the assessee as well as Revenue has been partly allowed for statistical purpose only.
(2.) ACCORDING to Mr. K.K. Bissa, learned Counsel following substantial question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal: Whether on the facts and in the present circumstances of the case as well as in the law, the learned Tribunal is justified in upholding the learned CIT(A)'s decision that the assessee fulfilled both the conditions of Section 32A(4)(i) of the IT Act, ignoring the facts of the case and allowing investment allowance of Rs. 6,14,450? Before the Tribunal Revenue has raised two grounds of appeal. We are concerned with second ground of appeal only. The facts of the ground No. (ii) of the Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal are that the AO has disallowed the claim of investment allowance on the plea that no particulars of plant and machinery were furnished and no investment allowance reserve was created. The assessee's case is that vide letter dt. 14th March, 2001 it had given a complete list along with copies of ledger accounts and the photocopies of invoices, but the AO failed to consider these evidences. However, CIT(A) allowed the claim of investment allowance.
(3.) WHILE answering the aforesaid ground the Tribunal has held that total investment in the plant and machinery was Rs. 30,82,291 on which claim of investment allowance was made at Rs. 6,16,458 for which necessary note was appended to the audited annual accounts for the year ended on 31st March, 1990, a copy of which was also furnished to the AO. The AO has disallowed the same because according to him (i) no particulars regarding plant and machinery were furnished, and (ii) no investment allowance reserve was created.;