1981 (1) TMI 126

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the deduction of 1/6th for repairs and certain amount of Corporation tax. 3. Later on, the CIT being of the opinion that the aforesaid assessment order was erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, because the excessive depreciation was allowed by the ITO and the income from property had not been properly worked out inasmuch as the deduction of 1/6th for repairs had been allowed in respect of certain income, which was not assessable under the head 'Income from house property' and that the Corporation tax was not properly calculated and demanded. He, accordingly, issued a show cause notice to the assessee as to why the said assessment be not revised under s. 263 (1) of the Act. This action of the CIT was o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on the decision of the Tribunal (Allahabad Bench-'B') in ITA Nos. 117 & 50/Alld/1977-78 (asst. yr. 1973-74), decided on 31st Oct., 1980, urged that the assessment order by the ITO on the point at issue was correct. These arguments of the assessee are controverted by the Deptl. Rep., who basing himself on the decision of the CIT vs. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co. as also of the Madras High Court in Puthuthotam Estates (1943) Ltd. vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1980) 125 ITR 41 (Mad), urged that there was no merger of the assessment order in that of the AAC, as urged by the representative for the assessee. On merits, the Deptl. Rep. urged that the approach of the CIT in that behalf was correct. 5. We have given consideration to the above arguments. In ....