| |
| The Tax Publishers2019 TaxPub(DT) 7505 (SC) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 261 Section 32(2)
Where the department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Bombay High Court in CIT v. M/s. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [ITA Nos. 134, 135, 136, 140, 141, 148, dt. 13-6-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5225 (Bom-HC), whereby the High Court held that the issue as to whether Tribunal was right in holding that the unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to assessment year 1997-98 to assessment year 2001-02 was allowable to be carried forward and adjusted after the lapse of 8 assessment years in view of section 32(2) as amended by the Finance Act, 2001 raised here stood concluded against the revenue and in favour of assessee by decision of the court in CIT v. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (2017) 394 ITR 73 (Bom), the Supreme Court dismissed the SLP.
|
Appeal (Supreme Court) - Special leave petition - Depreciation - Unabsorbed depreciation--carry forward and set-off
Department preferred SLP to appeal against the judgment of Bombay high Court in CIT v. M/s. Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. [ITA Nos. 134, 135, 136, 140, 141, 148, dt. 13-6-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5225 (Bom-HC), whereby the High Court held that the issue as to whether Tribunal was right in holding that the unabsorbed depreciation pertaining to assessment year 1997-98 to assessment year 2001-02 was allowable to be carried forward and adjusted after the lapse of 8 assessment years in view of section 32(2) as amended by the Finance Act, 2001 raised here stood concluded against the revenue and in favour of assessee by decision of the court in CIT v. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. (2017) 394 ITR 73 (Bom). Held: The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP.
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|