2009 (4) TMI 475 - ITAT MADRAS-D

Revision - For the relevant assessment year in the balance sheet of the assessee a provision for gratuity was reflected at ₹ 7,85,600 – Erroneous in the case that AO has not And Prejudicial Order - The learned counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that the claim of the assessee in regard to the provision for gratuity is allowable under s. 36(1)(v) of the Act - But the use of the non obstante expression in s. 40A(1) makes it clear that if there is any legislative base dealing with the provision for gratuity, then the same would be applicable in spite of and notwithstanding any other provision of the Act – There is no merit in the contention of learned counsel for the assessee that the decision of the Tribunal was rendered per incuriam – Appeal is dismissed