1979 (5) TMI 66

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... limited company and the accounting year ended on 31st Dec., 1975. Two contentions have been raised in this appeal and both relate to the computation of relief under s. 80J. The first contention is that the capital employed in the business should be computed by ignoring the provisions of r. 19A(3), following the decision in the case of Madras Industrial Linings Ltd.(1). Following that decision it ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rring to r. 19A(1) he stated that it should be computed in accordance with sub-r. 2 to 4. When sub-r. 3 is struck down, it would in effect mean that the entire rules should be taken to have been struck down as Ultra vires. The result is that the prescribed manner is not now available and if so there is no means of giving any relief to the assessee. For this proposition he relied on a decision of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....inally he submitted that in the absence of the rules no relief should be given. 4. The learned counsel on the other hand submitted that the result of the decision in 110 ITR 256 is not that the entire rules are made Ultra vires but only that s. 19A (3) should not be applied. In such a contingency the arguments advanced by the Departmental Representative has no force. The other part of the rules....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....not dealt with it can also be taken as having been held against the assessee. 7. Having considered the matter, we are of the opinion that since the assessee has raised this ground before the AAC and since he has failed to deal with it, it can be taken that he has held against the assessee. In this view of the matter it would be open to the assessee to canvass the same ground again before the Tr....