TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2759X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k profit u/s.115JB? - HELD THAT:- This issue was duly examined by the Coordinate Bench in the earlier years in the case of the assessee [ 2013 (1) TMI 135 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] wherein issue decided in favour of assessee. Therefore, taking a consistent view, we hereby dismiss this ground of Revenue s appeal. - I.T.A. No.729/Ahd/2010 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) - - - Dated:- 21-10-2015 - Shri P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imated gratuity provision of ₹ 3,73,68,158/- made on the basis of actuarial valuation, which is an unascertained liability as specifically settled in the case of Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 156 ITR (SC) Indian Molasses Co.Pvt.Ltd.a vs. CIT 37 ITR 66 (SC). 2. The ld.CIT-DR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) failed to consider the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court rendered in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Revenue has placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Shree Sajjan Mills Ltd. vs. CIT reported at 156 ITR 585(SC), wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has held that the provision for gratuity is not ascertained liability, therefore the same ought to have been added for computing the book profit u/s.115JB of the I.T.Act. The contention of the ld.counsel for the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the Tribunal s decision in assessee s own case in AY 200304. Ld.DR of the Revenue could not point out any difference in fact in present year. Hence, we do not find any reason to take a contrary view. This ground of Revenue is also rejected. Under the identical facts, for AY 2005-06 in ITA No.3864/Ahd/2008 the Tribunal held as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
