Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + SC Income Tax - 1986 (7) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1986 (7) TMI 86 - SUPREME COURTWhether the provision for additional cane price amounting to ₹ 8,16,000 was rightly treated as a 'reserve' forming part of the assessee's capital for the purposes of assessment to super profits tax for the year under consideration ? Held that:- In the present case, when the evidence clearly discloses that there was no liability at all on the assessee requiring it to set apart a sum as charge against its profits and there was never any intention to make payments to the cane growers nor was any payment ever made, but, on the contrary, the assessee reversed the entries in a subsequent year in its books, it is apparent that the amount cannot be described as a " provision ". It can only be described as a " reserve ". It was part of the capital which fell for computation under rule I of the Second Schedule. Appeal dismissed.
|