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

1953 Supreme(Cal) 145

CHAKRABARTI, LAHIRI
KARNANI INDUSTRIAL BANK LTD. – Appellant
Versus
COMMR. OF INCOME-TAX, WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BALAI CHANDRA PAUL, E.MEYER, SUKUMAR MITRA

CHAKRAVARTTI, C. J.

( 1 ) ONLY a few facts require to be stated in order to explain how the question referred in this case arises.

( 2 ) THE assessee, Messrs. Kamani Industrial Bank is a limited company and on 6-4-1938, it acquired from one of its creditors some cinematographic machinery at the price, as was claimed, of Rs. 3,94,000/ -. That figure of the cost of the machinery was accepted in successive assessments of the assessee, but was doubted for the first time in the course of the assessment for the year 1946-47. That year, the Income-tax Officer seems to have made an enquiry into the circumstances in which the machinery had been acquired and he came to the conclusion that its real cost to the assessee had been not Rs. 3,94,000/-, as claimed and as also allowed in previous assessments, but only Rs. 2,80,000/ -. Since he found that depreciation allowance of the amount of Rs. 2,84,000/- had already been allowed to the assessed, he came to the conclusion that the written down value had been reduced to a minus figure and, therefore, there was no further depreciation allowance to be allowed. Necessarily, in the next assessment also, that for the year 1947-48, he made a similar o









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