V.D. Wakharkar, Accountant Member - (1.) THIS is Revenue's appeal directed against the order of the CIT(A).
(2.) There is only one ground raised in this appeal. It relates to interpretation of the provisions of the Section 115J(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The facts of the case in brief are as follows. For the assessment year 1988-89, the assessee was originally assessed to an income of Rs. 39,39,228, after allowing deduction for the brought forward unabsorbed investment allowance of Rs. 54,76,236. It was subsequently found that the income assessable under Section 115J was Rs. 47,56,772. The assessment was therefore, rectified by bringing to tax the amount of Rs. 47,56,772. The Assessing Officer also held that in view of provisions of Section 115J(2), there was no unabsorbed investment allowance to be carried forward, as the entire unabsorbed investment allowance brought forward from earlier years amounting to Rs. 54,76,276 got adjusted against the assessee's income as computed under normal provisions of the Income-tax Act. He held that unabsorbed investment allowance will not be carried forward since Section 115J(2) provided that carry forward of unabsorbed loss, unabsorbed investment allowance etc. would remain unaffected by the provisions of Section 115J(1).The assessee carried the matter to the CIT(A). The assessee's grievance was that with the income assessed at Rs. 47,56,772, brought forward unabsorbed investment allowance remained unadjusted to the extent of Rs. 8,17,544 as per the calculations given below :- JUDGEMENT_11700_TLIT0_20030.htm
(3.) THE CIT(A) accepted the assessee's contention and allowed the assessee's claim. THE Revenue is in appeal before us against the direction of the CIT(A).;