https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26674 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Income-tax Officer's decision to withdraw initial depreciation from a larger Hindu undivided family in a partition deed was not legally justified. The court emphasized the necessity of identity between the beneficiary of depreciation and the seller for section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act to apply, along with the requirement that the sale consideration exceed the written down value. The judgment clarified the application of tax laws in partition deeds involving Hindu undivided families, underscoring the importance of accurate interpretation in such complex scenarios. en-us Tue, 05 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:36:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26674 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Income-tax Officer's decision to withdraw initial depreciation from a larger Hindu undivided family in a partition deed was not legally justified. The court emphasized the necessity of identity between the beneficiary of depreciation and the seller for section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act to apply, along with the requirement that the sale consideration exceed the written down value. The judgment clarified the application of tax laws in partition deeds involving Hindu undivided families, underscoring the importance of accurate interpretation in such complex scenarios. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26674