https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8880 A registered firm could not claim a second set-off of an earlier business loss in a later year where that loss had already been apportioned to partners under section 24, because proviso (c) to section 24(2) barred re-claim by the firm. Unabsorbed depreciation, however, retained its character as depreciation allowance under section 10(2)(vi), proviso (b), and could be carried forward to the firm's succeeding assessment year if full effect had not been given earlier, subject to prior adjustment of carried-forward business losses under section 24(2). en-us Fri, 14 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8880 A registered firm could not claim a second set-off of an earlier business loss in a later year where that loss had already been apportioned to partners under section 24, because proviso (c) to section 24(2) barred re-claim by the firm. Unabsorbed depreciation, however, retained its character as depreciation allowance under section 10(2)(vi), proviso (b), and could be carried forward to the firm's succeeding assessment year if full effect had not been given earlier, subject to prior adjustment of carried-forward business losses under section 24(2). Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Apr 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8880