Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the disallowance of obsolescence allowance was justified where the assessee maintained only subsidiary books and a buses valuation book, and not a complete day-book and ledger, but had written off the amount in the books maintained by him.
Analysis: The allowance under section 10(2)(vii) required that the relevant amount be actually written off in the assessee's books, but the provision did not prescribe any particular set of books as a condition precedent. The absence of a day-book or ledger did not mean that the assessee kept no books of account at all, especially when the record showed maintenance of subsidiary books and a buses valuation book containing the relevant entry. Section 13 permitted computation on an estimated basis where the method of accounting was defective, but that circumstance had no bearing on whether the allowance claim complied with the proviso to section 10(2)(vii).
Conclusion: The disallowance was not justified, and the assessee was entitled to the obsolescence allowance.
Ratio Decidendi: Compliance with the requirement of writing off the amount in the assessee's books is satisfied if the entry is made in the books actually maintained by the assessee; the proviso does not require maintenance of any prescribed or complete set of accounts.