9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 58X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as allowable under section 32(1)(iii) of the Act, though no such loss was claimed in the profit and loss account. That was explained before the Income-tax Officer saying that the assessee took a building for the purpose of its business on a leasehold land and the terms of the lease came to an end on March 31, 1972. It appears from the lease deed that the assessee took only the site and by spending a huge amount, put up a small structure. According to the lease deed, on the expiry of the term of the lease, the land along with any structure thereon was to revert back to the lessor without any compensation. Accordingly, the assessee surrendered the leasehold land along with the building standing thereon on March 31, 1972, to the lessor. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the assessee submitted that mention of section 32(1A) of the Act is not relevant on the facts of this case. He also submitted that the contention that the proviso to section 32(1)(iii) of the Act had not been satisfied need not be taken serious note of as that proviso was only directory in nature and not mandatory. We have considered the rival submissions. Section 32(1)(iii) of the Act, as it stood at the relevant period, reads as follows : " In respect of depreciation of buildings, machinery, plant or furniture owned by the assessee and used for the purposes of the business or profession, the following deductions shall, subject to the provisions of section 34, be allowed--- . . . . . (iii) in the case of any building, machinery ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e lease or other right of occupancy in respect of the building in the previous year (other than the previous year in which it is constructed or done) the amount by which the moneys payable in respect of such structure or work together with the amount of scrap value, if any, fall short of the written down value thereof : Provided that such deficiency is actually written off in the books of the assessee." Let us first deal with the contention of learned counsel for the Revenue by mentioning section 32(1A) of the Act. We do not think that, on the facts of this case, section 32(1A) has any relevance as the expenses incurred in this case were long prior to March 31, 1970. We have seen earlier that the assessee has surrendered the building ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
