9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (10) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... registered firm. The assessment year involved is 1973-74 and whereas the assessment was framed under s. 143(3) on 29th March, 1976, the AAC's order is dt. 22nd Nov., 1976. The cross objection has been filed to support the AAC's order no relief is sought for. 2. The assessee filed a return declaring a loss of Rs. 1,38,132 against which the ITO determined the loss at Rs. 1,146. The ITO while fra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D.S. Gupta, Advocate, appeared and submitted that on the contrary the provisions of s. 32(2) are without any ambiguity and in terms it is provided that in the case of a registered firm the unabsorbed depreciation has to be allocated between the partners. 5. Since the controversy revolves around the interpretation of s. 32(2), it is only in the fitness of things that we notice the provisions, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd deemed to be part of that allowance, or if there is no such allowance for that previous year, be deemed to be the allowance for that previous year, and so on for the succeeding previous year" If we read the opening words of sub-s. (2) carefully and bring in focus the use of the word `or' in the first sentence after the bracket and also notice the coma (,) succeeding `or' we can entertain no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o would be entitled to carry forward that loss or depreciation allowance and set it off against their other income. Once an allocation is made, there remains nothing with the firm which is to be carried forward on account of either there being no income or income being insufficient to absorb depreciation allowance. We, therefore, hold that the AAC rightly decided the issue in favour of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
