JUDGMENT
1. Although the service report is awaited but having regard to the fact that the issue raised in this appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), by the Revenue, stands concluded by a decision of this Court in CIT v. Bansal Credits Ltd dt. 13th Nov., 2002, in ITA No. 16/2002 and other connected matters, we feel that it would not be necessary to direct service of fresh notice on the respondent-assessed.
2. The only issue raised in the appeal is whether an assessed, who is engaged in the business of leasing out motor lorries, etc. but not using these vehicles in the business of hiring himself would be entitled to higher rate of depreciation under Appendix I to the IT Rules, 1962. In the afore-mentioned judgment we have held that for availing higher rate of depreciation what is mandatory is the user of the vehicle in the business of hiring, whether it is by the assessed-the Lesser or the lessee.
3. In the instant case, we find from the assessment order that higher rate of depreciation was disallowed to the assessed only on the ground that the assessed is only in the business of leasing and financing and is not running these vehicles on hire itself.
In view of the said decision, no substantial question of law survives for our consideration. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.