SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(Kar) 78

M.K.SRINIVASA IYENGAR, M.RAMA JOIS
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KARNATAKA-II – Appellant
Versus
INDIAN TELEPHONE INDUSTRIES LTD. – Respondent


SRINIVASA IYENGAR, J.

( 1 ) THESE three references relates to the same assessee and the question referred is common but in relation to the three assessment years 1970-71, 1971-72 and 1972-73. The question referred is as follows :

"whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on proper interpretation to be utilised for scientific research, would qualify for depreciation allowance under section 32 in the years other than the year of purchase ?"

( 2 ) THE question of allowing depreciation in respect of certain assets which had been purchased in the earlier years and utilised for purposes of scientific research by the assessee was not put forth before the ITO in the assessment years under consideration. But such a claim was put forth before the AAC in an appeal filed by the assessee against the orders of assessment. The AAC, following a decision of the Bombay Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, upheld the claim of the assessee and directed depreciation being allowed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, in respect of such assets. On further appeal by the department, the Commissioner, the above question has been referred for the opinion of this court.











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top