9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (4) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loss of Rs. 41,651. No claim was made for any deduction under section 80J of the Act for that year. The Incometax Officer did not, therefore, determine the deduction admissible under this provision of law for the purposes of carrying it forward and setting it off against profits and gains in any subsequent year. In the next assessment year, namely, 1973-74, the assessee, in the first instance, filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 11,769, but later filed revised return showing a loss of Rs. 42,069. Deduction under section 80J of the Act was claimed in the revised return for both the assessment years, 1972-73 and 1973-74. The Income-tax Officer determined and allowed deduction under section 80J for the year 1973-74 and carried it forw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n had become final. Further, the Income-tax Officer observed that the preconditions for the claim under section 80J of the Act for these two assessment years had not been fulfilled. The deduction to the extent of Rs. 1,404 for the assessment year 1976-77 was, however, allowed with the direction that this claim be carried forward and set off against profits and gains in the subsequent years. When the matter went up in appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the claim for 1974-75 and 1975-76 also, but as regards 1972-73, it was held that as this matter had become final by the order for the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee could not claim this benefit for that year. The Tribunal, however, allowed the deduction claimed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aking a claim has not been specifically done by the assessee in the first or the relevant assessment year, in a case where admittedly loss has been sustained and there is no profit or gain against which the deduction could at all be adjusted." This view has subsequently been followed in a string of authorities, namely, Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. V. CIT [1980] 122 ITR 660 (Cal); Bluemount Ceramics Ltd.'s case [1980] 123 ITR 385 (Mad) ; CIT v. Mattoo Worsted Spinning and Weaving Mills [1983] 139 ITR 1020 (J K) ; CIT v. Ennore Foundries Ltd. [1985] 151 ITR 464 (Mad) ; CIT v. Veljan Hydrair (P.) Ltd. [1985] 151 ITR 734 (AP) and CIT v. M. A. Paper and Card Board Factory Pvt. Ltd. [1986] 160 ITR 877 (Cal). Reliance on behalf of the Revenue w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be assumed that the prescribed conditions justifying a claim for exemption under section 84 were also fulfilled in the first year. It was emphasised that there was no material to support the claim. Neither of these two facts have been found to be present in our case. It has not been suggested that there is no material to calculate or compute the claim. It is evident that the assessee made the claim for the first year because it felt that it was, allowable for that year. In other words, for the first year, there must have been profits, else the question did not arise. The assessee was not claiming carry forward. For these reasons, this case is not helpful.. ." With respect, the view of the High Court of Allahabad in Sheetalaya's case [1979 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
