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

1957 Supreme(Cal) 164

P.B.CHAKRAVARTTI, B.K.GUHA
ALUMINIUM CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL, CALCUTTA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.P.KAR, H.N.SANYAL

P. CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS Reference under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act, involves a point which, though short, is somewhat tricky.

( 2 ) THE assessee is a company, called the Alluminium Corporation of India Limited and the assessment year in question is 1949-50. It appears that during the accounting year 1948-49, relative to that year of assessment, the assessee company showed a profit of Rs. 9,56,479/-which was done without deduction of the depreciation due for that year. The amount of depreciation allowance to which the assessee wag entitled in respect of its working during the year in question was Rs. 12,52,117/ -. The Income-tax Officer set off that depreciation against the pro-fit and determined the difference, namely, Rs. 2,95,638/-, as the loss for the year. The amount so determined as loss was directed to be carried over to the next year as unabsorbed depreciation.

( 3 ) THE company, however, had an amount of Rs. 27,359/- as loss carried forward from earlier years. Before the Income-tax Officer it was contended that against the year's profit of Rs. 9,56,479/-, the amount of the loss carried forward from the previous years, namely, Rs. 27,359/-, should firs


















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