It filed appeal before the Commissioner Appeals .
The assessee had unabsorbed investment allowance of previous years.
The assessee approached the Tribunal.
The assessee, however, was number satisfied with the aforesaid treatment of setting off of the unabsorbed depreciation instead of investment allowance.
Facts, as they appear in Civil Appeal Nos.
The assessee, still number satisfied, approached the Madras High Court.
2,87,15,912.
The Tribunal also companyfirmed the order of the Commissioner Appeals .
Therefore, instead of allowing the assessee to carry forward investment allowance, the Assessing Officer adjusted the unabsorbed depreciation of the earlier years, namely 1983 84, 1985 86, 1986 87 and 1987 88 part , and accepted Nil income return as filed by the assessee, but on the aforesaid basis.
In fact, the income for that year after showing exemptions, deductions and additions, which are to be made in terms of Sections 28 onward relating to companyputation of the business income, was arrived at ?
15251 of 2008.
K. SIKRI, J. Leave granted in Special Leave Petition Civil No.
