9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the undernoted question of law on Application No. 65/(Ind) of 1989 for the assessment year 1982-83 in connection with the order passed by the Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 773/(Ind) of 1985 : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the unabsorbed depreciation of the firm for the assessment years 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81 is allowable for set-off against the income of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On that application, the Tribunal stated the case and referred the question as noted above. We have heard Shri Puntambekar, learned counsel for the applicant assessee, and Shri D. D. Vyas, learned counsel for the non-applicant-Department. Shri Puntambekar submitted that the Tribunal committed an error of law in not allowing the set-off as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the restriction that it can be carried forward only in the hands of a partner of a firm. But there is no such restriction so far as carrying forward of depreciation under section 32 of the Act is concerned. The absence of such restriction or limitation in section 32 of the Act in permitting carrying forward of depreciation is a clear indication of the legislative intent that depreciation, if not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... " It is, thus, clear that unabsorbed depreciation can be carried forward indefinitely. That being so, the Tribunal fell into error in not allowing the set off. The point, therefore, stands concluded by the aforesaid decisions. In the result, we answer the question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Department, but without any orders as to costs. Counsel fee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
