Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1997 (12) TMI 48

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ther finding that the Income-tax Officer cannot impose any condition while allowing change of previous year is sustainable in law ?" The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the spinning of yarn, textiles, etc. The assessee was following the financial year as the previous year and in its application dated February 11, 1980, the assessee-company desired a change of its accounting year ending on the month of June of every subsequent year. The Income-tax Officer by his letter dated February 21, 1980, acceded to the request of the company on the following conditions : (i) The company can close their accounts for 15 months up to June 30, 1980, and offer proportionate income or loss for the period April 1,1979 to June 30, 1979, for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that under the provisions of the proviso to rule 5(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the Income-tax Officer was justified in allowing one fourth of the depreciation and dismissed the appeal. The assessee went up on appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal held that the proviso to rule 5(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, has no application and the same would apply only to a case where change in the previous year exceeds a period of 12 months or more. The Tribunal held that the conditions imposed by the Income-tax Officer for the change of previous year that the depreciation for 1980-81 would be allowed only for three months was void and the proviso to rule 5(1) of the I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o vary the expression "previous year" as is applicable to him except with the consent of the Income-tax Officer and upon such conditions as the Income-tax Officer may think fit to impose. Sub-section (4) of section 3 of the Act provides that it is impermissible for the assessee to change his previous year except with the consent of the Income-tax Officer and it is open to the Income-tax Officer to stipulate such conditions as the Income-tax Officer may think fit to impose in law for change of the previous year. In our view, the conditions imposed by the Income-tax Officer for the change of the previous year should be legal, valid and reasonable and should not be against the provisions of the Act. In Esthuri Aswathaiah v. CIT [1966] 60 ITR 4 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssible to curtail the amount of depreciation allowance only on the ground that the previous year fixed was three months, especially where the assessee is entitled to full depreciation even if the machinery or plant was used for the purpose of his business for a single day during the previous year. The anomaly pointed out by learned counsel for the Revenue is inherent in the statute granting the normal depreciation and the condition imposed cannot be against the provisions of the statute. Though the assessee has initially agreed that it will restrict its claim to depreciation for a period of three months, the condition imposed by the Income-tax Officer is against the provisions of the Act and it does not bind the assessee though it was accep .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ioning the same. We have already held that the conditions imposed by the Income-tax Officer should be reasonable and valid in the eye of law. Since the condition imposed by the Income-tax Officer in the instant case is not valid in the eye of law it has to be taken as a void condition and the assessee is not prevented from claiming full depreciation as the statutory provision permits the full depreciation if the machinery was used for a single day. Therefore, we are of the view that the Tribunal has come to the correct conclusion that the assessee is entitled to claim full amount of depreciation, notwithstanding the fact that the assessee had earlier accepted that it would claim depreciation at one fourth of the admissible depreciation. Acc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates