1976 (9) TMI 53

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lted on account of the fact that the assessee did not get a challan for payment of fees in connection with this appeal, though such a request was made to the ITO on 53rd day of the communication of the order appealed against. After hearing the parties, the delay is condoned and the appeal is entertained. 2. The first ground raised in this appeal filed by the assessee is regarding calculation of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... no profit chargeable to tax under s. 41(2). 3. The ITO however, computed the profit under s. 41(2) at Rs. 9,083 and included it in the total income determined at Rs. 34,250 in this year. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal to the AAC. The AAC held that no depreciation having been actually allowed for the asst. yr. 1969-70, nothing was to be deducted against the cost of Rs. 60,445. He....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re framed on 28th Feb., 1973 and the net income from the truck for the asst. yr. 1970-71 was estimated at Rs. 7,500 and for the asst. yr. 1971-72 at Rs. 4,000. In both the assessments, it is written that the aforesaid income was estimated after set-off of depreciation. It is because of the use of these words that the learned AAC has held that depreciation was actually allowed for the asst. yrs. 19....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee; it cannot be stretched to mean "notionally allowed" or merely allowable on a notional basis. The Allahabad High Court in (1971) 81 ITR 270 (All) has held that the written down value under s. 43(6)(b) means the actual cost of the assets less depreciation actually allowed and not a notional allowance that might be permissible under this section. In the assessment orders for the asst. yrs. ....