9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (7) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing the Income-tax Officer to allow the claim of the assessee to bring forward the unabsorbed depreciation determined in the earlier years and set off against the income of the year under consideration although such unabsorbed depreciation was apportioned in the past among the partners and was allowed to be adjusted against their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Income-tax (Appeals) from whose order it was found that the assessee's claim related to the unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to the assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78 since allocated for set-off against the income of the partners in the subsequent years. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) found that the unabsorbed depreciation still remaining unabsorbed for a particular year i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court. During the course of hearing, our attention was drawn to the decision in CIT v. Singh Transport Co. [1980] 123 ITR 698. The Gauhati High Court considered that depreciation allowance has been treated differently by the Legislature from business losses and losses in speculation business. The rigour of limitation is not applicable in the case of an unabsorbed depreciation allowance. Unabsorb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt years allocated to the partners, not wholly set off in their respective assessments, should be brought back for computation of the total income of the firm in the subsequent years, as if it were the firm's unabsorbed depreciation. Discussing further, it held that unabsorbed depreciation allowance goes to the partners by virtue of the provisions of section 32(2) itself and section 32(2) is a com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
