9911796707
TMI Blog1956 (10) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, hereinafter called the Act. Two questions of law are raised in the reference, one at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh and Bhopal, Nagpur, and the other, of the assessee. 2. The assessee is a registered firm and and owns a textile mill styled R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spinni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned. The contention of the assessee was accepted by the Tribunal. The question of law that arises out of the order is: "Whether the loss to be apportioned amounts to ₹ 1,04,885 or ₹ 1,15,309?" 3. In the year of account relevant for the assessment year 1949-50 the assessee spent a sum of ₹ 9,330 on the replacement of a cylinder in a sizing machine of the mill and spent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly if there is taxable income, and not otherwise. That section entitles the assessee and not the Department to claim a set-off of loss against profits to determine the marginal taxable income. It does not, therefore, entitle the Income-tax Officer to minimise the loss by setting off the profits. The cases relied upon by the Department, namely Commissioner of Income-tax v. Murlidhar Mathurawalla As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to reconstruction. When the existing asset is only maintained or preserved, the case is one of repairs and not reconstruction: see Commissioner of Income-tax v. Darbhanga Sugar Co. Ltd.([1956] 29 I.T.R. 21) and New Shorrock Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax([1956] 30 I.T.R. 338). The work that was done in the instant case was only intended to preserve and maintain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
