9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (8) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s arising out of the sale of original shares and right shares and a coupon of Jyoti Ltd., the cost of the shares sold to be deducted from the sale proceeds should be worked out by spreading the cost at which the original shares were purchased and the right shares ? For the assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75 : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case depreciation on plant and machinery used for scientific research was not available ?" Assessment years under reference are 1972-73 to 1974-75, the previous years being calendar years 1971 to 1973. The Tribunal ought to have made three separate references instead of one common reference. In other words, separate reference should have been made for each of the three ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner and the Income-tax Officer, bonus shares have been described as right shares in the question which has been referred to us. In other words, the word "right" in question No. 1 has to be read as "bonus" in the question. We, accordingly, reframe question No. 1. Question No. 1, as reframed, is concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Dalmia Investment Co. Ltd. [1964] 52 ITR 567. The same view has been taken by this court in Income-tax References Nos. 21 and 22 of 1978, decided on June 16, 1981, and Income-tax Reference No. 35 of 1980 (Alembic Chemical Works Co. Ltd. (No. 1) v. CIT [1992] 194 ITR 497), decided today. Therefore, following the aforesaid decisions, we answer question No. 1, as reframed, in the affirmative ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that section. Under the circumstances, the claim made by the assessee does not survive. Question No. 2, which has been referred to us for our opinion, shall, therefore, have to be answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. Reference answered, accordingly, with no order as to costs. At this stage, Mr. K. H. Kaji, learned counsel for the assessee, prays that, so far as question No. 1 is concerned, this case may be certified as fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court under section 261 of the Act. As pointed out above, question No. 1 has been answered against the assessee following the decision of the Supreme Court and the decisions of this court in income-tax references referred to above. We have, for the reasons recorded in detail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
