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, for computing the written down value of business assets and the balancing charge under the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii), only depreciation actually allowed in earlier assessments could be taken into account when the assessee's income had been estimated year to year.
Analysis: The statutory definition of written down value in section 10(5)(b) tied it to the actual cost less depreciation actually allowed under the Act. Depreciation merely worked out on an estimated basis, or notionally taken into account while estimating income under the proviso to section 13, was not the same as depreciation actually allowed in assessment orders. Since the balancing charge mechanism is intended to adjust the equities between the department and the assessee, it can operate only where depreciation has in fact been allowed in earlier years. On the facts, only the depreciation figures actually allowed in the relevant assessment years could be brought into the computation.
Conclusion: Only depreciation actually allowed could be considered in determining the written down value and the excess profit under the second proviso to section 10(2)(vii); the question was answered in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: For the purposes of section 10(5)(b) and the balancing charge under section 10(2)(vii), written down value must be computed only with reference to depreciation actually allowed in assessment, not depreciation merely estimated or notionally taken into account.