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 section 41(2) could be invoked on sale of a truck when no depreciation had actually been allowed in earlier assessments, and whether the written down value had to be computed on the basis of notional depreciation.
Analysis: The relevant rule is that "depreciation actually allowed" means depreciation actually computed and allowed in the assessment of business income, and not depreciation deemed to have been allowed merely on a notional basis. Where no depreciation was worked out or allowed in earlier years, the written down value for the asset remains its actual cost for the purpose of the corresponding charging provision. On the facts, no depreciation on the truck had been allowed in any earlier assessment, so the sale could not generate deemed profit under section 41(2) by applying hypothetical depreciation.
Conclusion: Section 41(2) was not applicable, and the addition based on notional depreciation was rightly deleted; the appeal failed.
Final Conclusion: The decision confirms that deemed balancing-charge income cannot be brought to tax unless depreciation was actually allowed in computing earlier business income.
Ratio Decidendi: For invoking section 41(2), depreciation must have been actually allowed in assessment, and not merely allowable on a notional basis; absent such actual allowance, the written down value is not reduced by hypothetical depreciation.