2018 (4) TMI 745

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bstantial questions of law: 1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessing officer's computation of setting off of unabsorbed depreciation first against the profits is principally correct without appreciating that the provisions of Section 205 of the Companies Act is not required to be applied to Section 115JA? 2.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal was right in directing the assessing officer to determine the depreciation or business loss of each year and to carry forward the lower of two for adjustment which will result in enhancement of assessment for which the Tribunal has no power? 3.Whether on the facts and in the circumstance....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essment. The Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to an earlier decision in the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd., Vs. CIT reported in (1967) 63 ITR 232 (SC). The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows: "6.In the case of Hukumchand Mills Ltd., Vs.CIT (1967) 63 ITR 232 (SC) this Court has held that under s.33(4) of the IT Act, 1922 [equivalent to s.254(1) of the 1961 Act]. The Tribunal was not authorized to take back the benefit granted to the assessee by the AO. The Tribunal has no power to enhance the assessment. Applying the ratio of the said judgment to the present case, we are of the view that in this case, the AO had granted depreciation in respect of 42,000 bottles out of the total number of bottles (5,46,000), by reason of th....