https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5616 The dominant issue was whether, in computing capital gains on transfer of a depreciable capital asset for which depreciation had been allowed, the assessee could substitute fair market value as on 1 January 1954 as the "cost of acquisition" under s. 55(2). SC held that capital gains are computed under s. 48, but where depreciation has been claimed, s. 50 mandatorily modifies the determination of "cost of acquisition" by reference to written down value; s. 50 contains no provision for fair market value substitution and operates independently of s. 55(2). Consequently, for depreciable assets, cost must be determined under s. 50 read with s. 48, and the HC's view favouring the Revenue was affirmed; the appeal on this question was dismissed. en-us Wed, 30 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Dec 2025 18:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5616 The dominant issue was whether, in computing capital gains on transfer of a depreciable capital asset for which depreciation had been allowed, the assessee could substitute fair market value as on 1 January 1954 as the "cost of acquisition" under s. 55(2). SC held that capital gains are computed under s. 48, but where depreciation has been claimed, s. 50 mandatorily modifies the determination of "cost of acquisition" by reference to written down value; s. 50 contains no provision for fair market value substitution and operates independently of s. 55(2). Consequently, for depreciable assets, cost must be determined under s. 50 read with s. 48, and the HC's view favouring the Revenue was affirmed; the appeal on this question was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5616