TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 682X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in favour of the assessee - Appeal is dismissed - Tax Appeal Nos. 1909 of 2008 and 798, 799, 800 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 9-2-2010 - PUJ K. A., RAJESH H. SHUKLA, JJ. JUDGMENT K. A. Puj J.- 1. In all these four tax appeals, parties are common and hence, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. Tax Appeal No. 1909 of 2008 is filed by the assessee under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1995-96 proposing to formulate the following substantial question of law for the determination and consideration of this court : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the validity of section 147/148 notice ? 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enior counsel appearing with Mr. Manish J. Shah for the assessee and Mr. M. R. Bhatt, learned senior advocate appearing with Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the Revenue. 5. So far as the assessment year 1995-96 is concerned, there are cross appeals, one filed by the assessee and the other one is filed by the Revenue. The assessee is aggrieved by the finding recorded by the Tribunal with regard to reopening of assessment. The Tribunal has held that reopening of assessment is justified and hence, the assessee has filed tax appeal before this court challenging the said finding of the Tribunal. The Revenue has filed tax appeal for the assessment year 1995-96 challenging the decision of the Tribunal deleting the disallowanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00] 245 ITR 428 wherein the court has observed that if a business liability has definitely arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed, although the liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date. What should be certain is the incurring of the liability. It will also be capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty though the actual quantification may not be possible. In such circumstances, the liability cannot be contingent one and the liability is in presenti and would not make any difference if the future date on which the liability shall have to be discharged is not certain. The Tribunal has further recorded the finding that the expenditure incurred by the assessee out of the provisions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urred an amount of Rs. 3,30,74,857. The detailed break-up submitted by the assessee is as under : Assessment year Expenditure incurred (Rs.) Cumulative expenses (Rs.) Excess of expenditure over provision charged to profit and loss account (Rs.) 1996-97 86,20,677 86,20,677 1997-98 82,36,136 1,68,56,813 1998-99 57,22,016 2,25,78,829 1999-2000 92,48,059 3,18,26,888 84,26,888 2000-2001 12,47,969 3,30,74,857 12,47,969 Total 3,30,74,857 96,74,857 10. Since the assessee has incurred the expenditure more than the provision made, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
