9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (5) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s purchased by the assessee during the previous year relevant to the asst yr. 1973-74 for Rs. 66,734 was sold on 17th Aug, 1977, that is, during the previous year relevant to this asst. yr. For Rs. 35,000. It was claimed before the ITO that since no depreciation on this truck was actually allowed, the provisions of s. 41(2) will not be applicable and, therefore, there is no question of any deemed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount. When the matter went up in appeal, the AAC held that for the purpose of arriving at the written down value what has been deducted from the actual cost is the depreciation which had been actually allowed and since no depreciation was allowed in the earlier years in working out the income from the truck, there was no question of any profit u/s 41(2). The AAC, therefore deleted the addition o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the business income or carried forward and where there is no such depreciation which was worked out in the assessment order or actually allowed while working out the business income or was carried forward, the written down value as laid down u/s 43(6)(b) will be the actual cost of the asset to the assessee. He, therefore, submitted that since no depreciation on the truck was worked out and allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Badri Prasad Jagan Prasad vs. CIT, also laid down that where no depreciation had been worked out the allowed as a deduction in working out the business income, the second proviso to s. 10(2) (vii) of the Indian IT Act, 1922 (Corresponding to s. 41(2) of the IT Act, 1961, under consideration before us cannot be invoked. Viewed in this context, it is not under dispute that in the assessments of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
