9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for opinion to this court : "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was in law justified in upholding the decision of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who allowed the assessee's claim for carry forward and set off unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier year?" The present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unabsorbed depreciation amounting to Rs. 1,98,476 for the assessment year in question. The Revenue feeling aggrieved preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has dismissed the appeal by the following orders: "The order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) shows that the assessee's claim for carryforward and set off was in respect of unabsorbed depreciation and not in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 72, 73, 74 and 74A if such losses have been determined in pursuance of a return filed under section 139(1). If return has not been filed under section 139(1) or within such time as may be allowed by the Income-tax Officer, in such a case, business loss other than unabsorbed depreciation cannot be allowed to be carried forward and set off in the subsequent years in view of the amended provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rlier year had not been determined in terms of sections 72 to 74A of the Act the respondent was not entitled to carry forward unabsorbed depreciation in view of the provisions of section 80 of the Act. His submission is misconceived. Section 80 of the Act confines itself to the losses mentioned in subsection (1) of section 72 or sub-section (2) of section 73 or sub-section (1) or sub-section (3) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
