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 assessee was entitled to depreciation allowance and development rebate in respect of the disputed expenditure, and whether the figures mentioned in the reference question were to be treated as correct and binding.
Analysis: The reference concerned capitalisation of pre-production expenditure for assessment year 1957-58. The question had already been concluded by the governing legal principle that such expenditure forms part of the actual cost for the purpose of depreciation and development rebate. The court also clarified that the figures stated in the reference question were incorrect and that the figures recorded in the Tribunal's statement of case were to be treated as correct.
Conclusion: The question was answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee, and the Tribunal's corrected figures were accepted as binding for the reference.