COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. HARYANA HOTELS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "E", New Delhi (in short "the Tribunal"), has filed this appeal under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act"),

(2.) INCOME as nil. The same was treated as an invalid return as it was not accompanied by audited accounts and the assessee was informed accordingly. The assessee filed its revised return accompanied by audited accounts and tax audit asst. yr. 1987 -88. The delay was condoned under s. 119(2B) of the Act by the competent authority and the AO was directed to complete the assessment in relation to time -limit prescribed under the Act and another revised return was under s. 143(3) of the Act, allowed unabsorbed depreciation to be carried forward to the extent of Rs. 24,17,869. However, he disallowed the brought forward losses and unbsorbed depreciation of earlier assessment years and their set off on the ground that no valid assessment had been made for the asst. yr. 1986 -87. The assessee, feeling aggrieved, preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals) [in short, "the CIT(A)"], wherein in ground No. 7, it had challenged the action of the AO in not allowing set off of unabsorbed depreciation during the asst. yr. 1987 -88 on the ground that the same is not allowed as the assessment for the year 1986 -87 had not been completed. The CIT(A), however, partly allowed the appeal and directed the AO to recalculate the same for the assessment year in question and written down value should accordingly be redetermined for being carried forward to the succeeding year.

(3.) THE assessee preferred further appeal to the Tribunal assailing the order of the CIT(A) regarding the carry forward of unabsorbed losses and disallowance of unabsorbed depreciation for the asst. yrs. 1984 -85 and 1985 -86 during the asst. the claim of carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation as well as unabsorbed losses subject to the period of limitation in respect of the unabsorbed losses. The Revenue had also filed an application under s. 254(2) of the Act before the Tribunal on the ground that the issue regarding carry forward of business losses was not taken up by the assessee before the CIT(A) and, therefore, the issue application and observed that the point of unabsorbed business losses was raised by the assessee before the CIT(A) and the same was rejected by him and thus, such issue arose from the order of the CIT(A) and it was justified in adjudicating the issue. The copy of the application filed before the Tribunal, the reply filed by the assessee and the order Misc. No. 22284 -CII of 2004.