Case Details

Citation(s)
2005 SLG 2196 2005 SLD 2196 (2005) 274 ITR 600
Madras High Court
TAX CASE No. 22 OF 2002 MARCH 15, 2004
A.S. VENKATACHALAMOORTHY AND P.K. MISHRA, JJ.

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

Kothari Industrial Corpn. Ltd.*

Law:

Section:

Section 43(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Written down value - Assessment year 1972-73 - One company 'B' was amalgamated with assessee-company - Assessing Officer completed assessment without allowing claim of carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation relating to earlier years - Tribunal negatived assessee's claim but directed Assessing Officer to adopt written down value of assets transferred to assessee from 'B' without reducing therefrom unabsorbed depreciation relating to earlier years - Whether Tribunal was justified in doing so - Held, yes FACTS During the accounting year relating to assessment year 1972-73 one company 'B' was amalgamated with the assessee-company. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under sections 147(b) and 143(3) without allowing the claim of carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation relating to earlier years. The Tribunal negatived the assessee's claim but directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the written down value of the assets transferred to the assessee from 'B' without reducing therefrom the unabsorbed depreciation. On reference : HELD In view of provisions of section 43(6) the direction of the Tribunal to adopt the written down value of the transferred assets without reducing the unabsorbed depreciation appeared to be justified.[Para 4] The Bombay High Court in CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 1 . Held that the written down value of the assets would be the actual cost of the assets to the assessee less depreciation actually allowed to the company. Any unabsorbed depreciation which was not set off for carry forward could not be taken into account. [Para 5] Thus, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the written down value of the transferred assets of the amalgamating company should be worked out without reducing therefrom the unabsorbed depreciation relating to earlier years. CASE REVIEW CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 1 (Bom.)followed and relied upon. CASES REFERRED TO CIT v. Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 1/[1990] 53 Taxman 512 (Bom.) [Para 5]. Mrs. Pushya Sitaraman for the Applicant. N. Quadir Hussain for the Respondent. JUDGMENT P.K. Misra,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492