Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1985 (10) TMI 18

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with section 18 of the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963. The assessment year with which we are concerned is the assessment year 1963-64. The question relates to the computation of capital of the assessee-company for the calculation of standard deduction permissible to it under the Super Profits Tax Act. The questions referred to us for our opinion are....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... drawn up. It is totally short on facts which are required for the determination of the questions referred. As far as question No. 1 is concerned, there is nothing in the statement of the case to indicate what was the amount provided for depreciation in the accounts of the assessee-company and what was the depreciation claimed by the assessee-company for tax purposes and allowed for the assessment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... paid or not or what was the amount which was actually utilised for the payment of this dividend. Unfortunately, the judgment of the Tribunal is even shorter on facts than the statement of the case. We can understand that the Tribunal might not have considered it necessary to set out all the facts in the judgment, but, in that case, the facts should have been ascertained and set out in the stateme....