1980 (2) TMI 167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the relevant previous year which ended 30th Sept., 1974 after making some adjustment depreciation allowance for the said year amounting to Rs. 49,22,621 has been deducted from the adjusted profit of Rs. 1,59,95,637 resulting the net amount of Rs. 1,10,73,016 against which ITO has set out the brought forward losses and depreciation of the earlier, so that the ultimate income determined the assessment is nil. The assessee's contention before the departmental authorities which has not been accepted by them and which therefore is agitated before us in this appeal is that the allowance can only be given on a claim made by the assessee and its furnishing the prescribed particulars as required, the allowance cannot be granted or deducted in compu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. L.G. Ramamurthi & Others.(2) It is pointed out at page 467 of the report that the Court itself has indicated the circumstances where there can be a departure from the view taken in earlier year by the Bench of the Tribunal. According to the observations of Court on the said page if a single judge of a High Court takes a view different from the one taken by another judge on a question of law, he does not finally pronounce his view and the matter is referred to a Division Bench. Similarly, if a Division Bench differs from the view taken by another Division Bench it does not express disagreement and pronounce its different views, but has the matter posted before a Fuller Bench for considering the question. It was further observed in that ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assets. It was urged that for ascertaining true profits in the business sense, the wear and tear of assets utilised by the assessee for the purpose of earning his profits will have to be considered and allowances to be given for the same. The learned representative for the assessee on the other had submitted that a question before the Bombay High Court in the case relied upon by the learned departmental representative is different from the question which arises in this appeal and therefore it is distinguishable. 4. Having carefully considered the facts and contentions of the parties, we uphold the claim of the assessee. The question as to whether an assessee can waive his right to claim of depreciation allowance or it can be thrust on it....