9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (3) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome-tax Act, 1961, in T. C. Nos. 995 and 996 of 1980, arising out of the same order of the Tribunal. The questions are as follows: " 1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal's finding that the assessee had adopted the practice of writing off the value of the entire cost of the distribution rights of the film in the year of acquisition and valued the closing stock as 'nil' is based on the facts found in this case and is sustainable in law ? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal's finding that the method of writing off the cost of the distribution rights in the year of acquisition itself is a proper method of accounting and that profits can be rightly deduced therefrom is proper and is reasonable on the facts found in this case ? " Both these ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the accounting year irrespective of the date of the release but was not entitled to any amortisation in respect of those films which were acquired during the year but not released. The Tribunal, however, held that the assessee had been adopting a consistent method of accounting in which it was writing off the entire cost of the distribution rights in the year of acquisition and this had been accepted by the Department up to 1969-70 and as the Department had not shown that this method was such that the profits and gains could not be properly deduced therefrom, the assessee was entitled to amortisation even in regard to those films which had been acquired, but which had not been released during the year. The assessee's claim for amortisa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is contended by learned counsel for the Revenue is that when the Board has prescribed that amortisation in full may be permitted where the film is released in the first half of the accounting year and amortisation at half the rate would be permissible if the film is released in the other half year, the circular Purports to grant a concession and the assessee cannot claim amortisation on any other basis. Now, the circular by the Board would be in the nature of an ad hoc direction to the Income-tax Officer. That circular has no statutory basis. We are more concerned in these references with the finding recorded by the Tribunal where the Tribunal has clearly observed that it cannot be stated that the profits of the assessee during the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
