TMI Blog1970 (12) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment year concerned in this reference is 1956-57, the relevant previous year being 2011 Guzrati Dewali Sambat year corresponding to the period from 26th October, 1954, to 17th June, 1955. The assessee is Messrs. R. Shantilal and Company which was assessed in the status of an unregistered firm for the relevant assessment year, and which sold and transferred its business as a going concern to,a private limited company st led as Messrs. R. Shantilal Company Private Ltd. shortly before the close of the aforesaid accounting year and the assessee-firm was dissolved on the last date of the accounting year, viz., the 17th June, 1955. In its books of account for the current year which were maintained on the mercantile system of accounting the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee with the demand notices. As in the present case such demand notices relating to the liabilities for the Sambat years 2008 and 2009 had been received by the assessee on the 8th February, 1955, the Tribunal held that the entire amount of Rs. 47,505 must be allowed as legitimate business expenses against the profits of the assessee of the Sambat year 2011. On the application of the Commissioner the following question has been referred to this court by the Tribunal, viz. : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal wag right in holding that the entire sum of Rs. 47,505 represented the accrued liability of the assessee on account of sales tax and as such was liable to be allowed as a deduction in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ji to show us any finding by any of the three authorities below that even after the receipt of the demand notices the assessee was still disputing its liability to pay the sales tax demanded in respect of Sambat years 2008 and 2009. Mr. Banerji was unable to bring to our notice any such finding by any of the authorities below. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was justified in allowing the deduction of the amounts of sales tax for the Sambat years 2008 and 2009 for which the demand notices had been served on the assessee during the current account year. The question referred to this court must, therefore, be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs of this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
