Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1980 (10) TMI 96 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal upholds CIT (A) directions on income computation, depreciation set-off, & pro rata basis for ship depreciation The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's cross-objection. It upheld the CIT (A)'s directions to recompute income in ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal upholds CIT (A) directions on income computation, depreciation set-off, & pro rata basis for ship depreciation

                            The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and partly allowed the assessee's cross-objection. It upheld the CIT (A)'s directions to recompute income in compliance with the law, ensuring unabsorbed depreciation from earlier years was carried forward for set-off. The Tribunal also confirmed calculating depreciation on a pro rata basis based on the ship's time in Indian waters.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Entitlement to depreciation allowance on a turnover basis versus both turnover and time basis.
                            2. Reopening of the entire depreciation question during reassessment.
                            3. Direction to ensure unabsorbed depreciation from earlier years is carried forward and allowed as a set-off.
                            4. Legality of reassessment proceedings under Section 147(b) of the IT Act.
                            5. Correct method of calculating depreciation for non-resident companies maintaining accounts in foreign currency.
                            6. Pro rata basis for depreciation allowance.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Entitlement to Depreciation Allowance on Turnover Basis vs. Both Turnover and Time Basis:
                            The Revenue contended that the CIT (A) erred in holding that the assessee was entitled to depreciation allowance proportionately under IT Rule 10(ii) only on the turnover basis and not on both turnover and time basis as worked out by the ITO. The CIT (A) upheld the principle that the depreciation should be computed on the actual cost in rupees of the ships engaged in Indian trade, including those brought prior to 1966 when the rupee was devalued.

                            2. Reopening of the Entire Depreciation Question During Reassessment:
                            The CIT (A) allowed the assessee to contend that the entire depreciation question should be reopened to see whether excessive depreciation had been allowed. This was based on the Bombay High Court decision in the case of New Kaiser-I-Hind Spg & Wvg Co Ltd. (1977) 107 ITR 760 (Bom). The Tribunal upheld this view, allowing the reassessment to consider the entire depreciation question.

                            3. Direction to Ensure Unabsorbed Depreciation from Earlier Years is Carried Forward and Allowed as a Set-off:
                            The CIT (A) directed the ITO to ensure that all unabsorbed depreciation relating to earlier years was duly brought forward and allowed as a set-off. The Tribunal found nothing wrong with this direction, stating that if there is any unabsorbed depreciation from earlier years, the assessee is entitled to such carry forwards as permitted by law.

                            4. Legality of Reassessment Proceedings Under Section 147(b) of the IT Act:
                            The assessee challenged the initiation of proceedings under Section 147(b), but the CIT (A) upheld the ITO's action, finding that excessive depreciation had been allowed, which led to the belief that the income of the assessee had been underestimated in the original assessment. The Tribunal supported this view, relying on the Supreme Court decision in the case of R.K. Malhotra, ITO, Group CIR II (I) Ahmedabad vs. Kasturbai Lalbhai (1977) 109 ITR 537 (SC).

                            5. Correct Method of Calculating Depreciation for Non-Resident Companies Maintaining Accounts in Foreign Currency:
                            The assessee argued that since it maintained accounts in Dinars and the ships were purchased in Dinars, the depreciation allowance should be computed in Dinars. The CIT (A) directed the ITO to compute the depreciation based on the actual cost in rupees, considering the devaluation of the rupee. The Tribunal upheld this direction.

                            6. Pro Rata Basis for Depreciation Allowance:
                            The CIT (A) had directed that the depreciation be calculated on a pro rata basis. The Tribunal found that the correct method of working the depreciation would only be on the basis of the time factor based on the number of days the ship had spent in Indian waters. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's cross-objection on this ground, stating that the plea was in consonance with IT Rule 5.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and partly allowed the cross-objection filed by the assessee. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s directions to recompute the income in accordance with the law irrespective of the consequences and to ensure that any unabsorbed depreciation from earlier years was carried forward and allowed as a set-off. The Tribunal also upheld the method of calculating depreciation on a pro rata basis based on the number of days the ship had spent in Indian waters.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found