KALANI UDYOG Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, referring for our answer the following question of law :

(2.) THE facts, briefly stated, are that the assessee, M/s. Kalani Udyog, is a registered firm. THE relevant assessment year is 1970-71, for which the previous year ended on 31st March, 1970. In the course of assessment, the assessee contended before the ITO that it should be allowed to set off its losses for the years 1968-69 and 1969-70. This was negatived by the ITO. THE assessee's appeal was also dismissed by the AAC. THE Tribunal also dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the assessee also submitted that the entire loss of Rs. 60,419 is not business loss and that it is partly depreciation loss. THE statement of the case, however, proceeds upon the assumption that the whole of it is business loss. Indeed, the Tribunal in its order has made reference only to Section 75, and not to Section 32. Had it been argued before the Tribunal that part of this loss was depreciation loss, Section 32 would have been referred to in the arguments before the Tribunal. Be that as it may, the statement of the case and the question referred to us relate only to the application of Section 75. We are not entitled to travel beyond that and to go into the question whether depreciation loss can be carried forward by a registered firm.