1982 (4) TMI 141

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....car which was used for the purposes of the business of the partnership firm, Prakash Book Depot, in which he was a partner. 2. The appellant is a partner in Prakash Book Depot. For the assessment year 1977-78, relevant for the previous year ended31-3-1977, he declared an income of Rs. 19,165. While taking the share income from the firm Prakash Book Depot as determined in the firm's case at Rs. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ss profits. According to the AAC, a firm and its partners are separate legal entities for purposes of income-tax and that the appellant was not using the car for earning his income, a fact borne out from records because all the running expenses of the car were being debited to the firm's account. She, therefore, held that the ITO's reasoning for rejecting the appellant's claim for depreciation on ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r of the firm, he was entitled to depreciation thereon. Their Lordships followed the decision of the same High Court in M.Ct. Muthiah v. CIT [1974] 97 ITR 516 (Mad.) which followed the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Ramniklal Kothari [1969] 74 ITR 57. In the case of the present appellant before me, there is no dispute that the car is owned by him and that the said car has been utilised fo....