1,94,074 as per working sheet attached.
The appellant requested the Income tax Officer to cancel his previous order and to pass a fresh order companyrecting onlv those mistakes which had been pointed out by it On the same day the appellant sent another letter asking for the cancellation of the provisional assessment order for 1954 55 and requested for a revised assessment order on the basis of the return filed by it.
The companyrect companyputation of income is as under Income before allowing depreciation as per original assessment orderRs.1,00,674 Less charity disallowed wrongly written Rs.
The order of the Income tax Officer was as follows To arrive at the Written Down Value of the assets it was necessary to maintain depreciation record.
This being number done so far, is done number and working attached.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India, R. Ganapathy Iyer and D. Gupta, for the respondent.
On April 16, 1956, the appellant filed a petition in the High Court of Bombay under Arts.
V. Viswanatha Sastri, S. P. Mehta, J. B. Dadachanji, S. Andley and Rameshwar Nath, for the appellants.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated November 26, 1957, of the Bombay High Court at Rajkot in Special Civil Application No.
On February 29, 1956, the Income tax Officer passed two provisional assessment orders for the years 1954 55 and 1955 56.
Depreciation allowance as per rules is worked out at Rs.
119 of 1956.
In this application he pointed out several mistakes in calculations in regard to the depreciation amount.
2,31,944 was reduced to Rs.
The appellant Was taxed for the accounting year 1949, i.e., the assessment year 1950 51.
By his order of February 27, 1956, the Income tax Officer companyrected the Written Down Value of the different properties of the appellant and determined the total allowable depreciation to be Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAPUR, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissing the appellants petition under Art.
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1,94,074.
On August 8, 1955, the appellant made an application for rectification under s. 35 of the Act.
April 14.
By that Ordinance income tax became leviable and from 1950 onwards when Saurashtra became part of the Union of India the Indian Income tax Act hereinafter referred to as the Act became applicable by reason of the Finance Act of 1950 Act XXV of 1950 .
In 1949 the Saurashtra Income tax Ordinance hereinafter termed the Ordinance was promulgated which was applicable to the State of Saurashtra.
Rs.83,295 Loss on account of depreciation to be carried forward.
The High Court also held against the appellant on merits.
On March 9, 1956, the appellant wrote to the Income tax Officer protesting against the order You have exercised powers number vested in you under the said Section, and you have gone beyond the purview of the Act by preparing statements and records which are prejudicial to the rights of the Company .
According to the assessment order dated June 30, 1965, the amount of depreciation allowed for the assessment year 1953 54 was Rs.
The appellant companytinued to be assessed to income tax in the assessment years 1952 53 and 1953 54 and the present appeal relates to the assessment of year 1953 54.
20,124 Rs.1,765 Income Rs.98,909 Less depreciation Rs.1,94,074 Rs.95,165 Less Dividend income as per origi nal assessment order Rs.11,870 Loss.
Declared N. A. And thus the unabsorbed depreciation amount which under the assessment order of June 30, 1955, was Rs.
3,48,105.
The reply of the Income tax Officer of the same date was that the order was companyrect and a similar order was made on the second application in regard to the assessment of 1954 55.
The appellant before us is a private limited companypany carrying on the business of manufacturing and selling textiles and the respondent is the Income tax Officer of Porbander.
Previous to the year 1949, in Porbander which became a part of the State of Saurashtra, there was numberincome tax.
39 of 1959.
21,889 instead of Rs.
83.,295 and this was set off against the appellants income of the assessment year 1954 55.
The reasons for calculating them on the new basis were set out by the Income tax Officer in his order dated May 18, 1956, and they were Less Depreciation.
In both these orders he calculated the depreciation amounts on the basis of the same Written Down Value as he had determined for the year 1953 54.
