https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286719 The court, with a majority view from Beaumont and Rangnekar, concluded that in the context of an assessment under Section 26(2), the term "assessee" in Section 10(2)(vi) should refer to the predecessor, and the depreciation allowance should be based on the original cost to the predecessor firm. Blackwell dissented, arguing that depreciation should be calculated based on the original cost to the successor company. Ultimately, the court ruled against the Income-tax Officer's computation method, supporting the majority view. en-us Fri, 15 Oct 1937 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Mar 2020 16:29:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286719 The court, with a majority view from Beaumont and Rangnekar, concluded that in the context of an assessment under Section 26(2), the term "assessee" in Section 10(2)(vi) should refer to the predecessor, and the depreciation allowance should be based on the original cost to the predecessor firm. Blackwell dissented, arguing that depreciation should be calculated based on the original cost to the successor company. Ultimately, the court ruled against the Income-tax Officer's computation method, supporting the majority view. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 Oct 1937 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286719