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

1999 Supreme(Cal) 348

RANJAN KUMAR MAZUMDER, Y.R.MEENA
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX – Appellant
Versus
J. K. INDUSTRIES LTD. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.PAL, M.P.AGRAWAL, NIYAZUDDIN KHAN, R.K.Biswas

Y. R. MEENA, J.

( 1 ) BY this reference application made under Section 256 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for our opinion :"for the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 : whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the direction of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to withdraw the depreciation on assets allowed by the Assessing Officer, though not claimed by the assessee ? for the assessment year 1979-80 : whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) directing the computation of capital gain/loss on the sale of assets either by taking into consideration the original cost of the assets or their written down value after giving effect to his appellate order (i. e. , withdrawing depreciation) ?"

( 2 ) IN response to a notice under Section 139 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee filed the returns on November 30, 1978, showing loss of Rs. 7,07,39,219. Those returns were revised and the assessee filed a revised return. In that, he reduced the





















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