9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (8) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, the following question of law has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"), for its opinion : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal erred in allowing carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation amounting to Rs. 1,70,631 in the hands of the firm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firm for adjustment and set off against the profits of the firm in the subsequent years. The claim of the assessee was declined by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which was accepted. In appeal, it was held that the Income-tax Officer had erred in law and on facts in apportioning the unabsorbed depreciation amounting to Rs. 1,70 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent in spite of service. Counsel for the Revenue has been heard at length. The point involved is no longer res integra and open to discussion in view of the judgment rendered by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Garden Silk Weaving Factory v. CIT [1991] 189 ITR 512. In this judgment, it has been held that though a firm and its partners are distinct assessees for the purposes of income-tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rm will carry forward the remaining unadjusted depreciation to the subsequent years. In view of the law laid down by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Garden Silk Weaving Factory's case [1991] 189 ITR 512, the question referred to this court is answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee and it is held that after adjusting the depreciation against th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
