9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (3) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Dated:- 31-3-1971 - Judge(s) : R. S. PATHAK., H. N. SETH. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by H. N. SETH J.- This is a combined reference in respect of assessment years 1954-55, 1955-56, 1956-57 and 1957-58, made at the instance of the assessee, Matrumal Dhanna Lal, under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family doing business under the name and style of Matrumal Dhanna Lal of Hathras. There is an oil mill situated at Chemar Gate, Hathras. This mill along with another oil mill situated at Aligarh originally belonged to the partnership firm, Messrs. Kishan Lal Matrumal, formed on August 13, 1935, by five partners including Rai Sahib L. Dhanna Lal as representing the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the hands of the assessee-firm should have been fixed on the basis that its actual cost to the assessee was Rs. 1,53,348 and that the written down value in the assessment year 1954-55 was the difference between the said amount and the depreciation actually allowed to the assessee-family from the assessment year 1947-48 up to and including the assessment year 1953-54. He, accordingly, determined the written down value, on this basis, for the assessment year 1954-55 to 1957-58. The assessee thereafter preferred an appeal against the orders for these years before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, contending that the oil mill in question had been purchased by it for a sum of Rs. 9,50,000 and that its written down value should have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... written down value that had been determined by him in the earlier years. In the result the order made by the Income-tax Officer was restored. At the instance of the assessee the Tribunal has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court : "1. Whether the Income-tax Officer, while determining the written down value of a particular asset in the year under assessment, is competent to ignore and go behind its written down value fixed in the year or years preceding thereto ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal rightly held that the actual cost of the oil mill in question to the assessee remained what it was in the case of the firm of Kishan Lal Matrumal ? Learned counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e matter in appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that, barring the cases of collusion, inflation and deflation of values for ulterior purposes, the cost of asset to a divided member must necessarily be its cost to him at the time of partition, whether mentioned in the partition deed or ascertained aliunde. If the valuation of the property for purposes of partition was not notional but was real and that was the basis for allocating the properties to different members, cost of property allotted to a member cannot be that at which it was purchased by the joint family in a remote post but would be the value given to it for the purpose of allotment or at which it was auctioned for purposes of partition. In the instant case w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
