https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276258 On business succession, the predecessor could not claim set-off of business loss under Section 24 because Section 26(2) operates mandatorily and the successor alone is treated as the assessee for the transferred business. The Court rejected reliance on hardship or absence of profits, holding that the plain words of the provision control the assessment position. The predecessor also could not carry forward unabsorbed depreciation for the transferred business, since that benefit belongs only to the person continuing to derive profits from the business concerned. Both claims were rejected against the assessee. en-us Mon, 09 Oct 1939 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Nov 2018 15:35:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276258 On business succession, the predecessor could not claim set-off of business loss under Section 24 because Section 26(2) operates mandatorily and the successor alone is treated as the assessee for the transferred business. The Court rejected reliance on hardship or absence of profits, holding that the plain words of the provision control the assessment position. The predecessor also could not carry forward unabsorbed depreciation for the transferred business, since that benefit belongs only to the person continuing to derive profits from the business concerned. Both claims were rejected against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 09 Oct 1939 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276258