Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 1979 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 37 (1) or 36(1)(v) - expenditure being the premises actually paid to LIC under Group Gratuity Scheme – Cum Life Insurance Scheme - Principle of consistency - disallowance of gratuity expenses being claim of the assessee on the ground that the gratuity scheme was not approved as per the requirement of section 36(1)(v) and the assessee has failed to produce necessary certificate in support of the same - HELD THAT:- It is just because the assessee is not able to prove the copy of the approval, the claim has been denied to the assessee. We are of the view that this claim of the assessee is allowable on the plea of consistency. As decided in the case of Radhasaomi Satsang Saomi Bagh [1991 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] held that the assessments are quasi-judicial and each assessment year being a unit, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different A.Y. s has been found as a fact one way or the other and the parties have allowed that position to be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year. As the employer bank does not have any control over the funds of the irrevocable trust created exclusively for the benefit of the employees and that the assessee had absolutely no control over the fund created by the LIC for the benefit of the employees of the assessee and further all the contribution made by the assessee in the said fund ultimately came back to the Bank Employees Gratuity Fund. The assessee has also obtained the policy in favour of the bank - thus we hold that the assessee is entitled for deduction for payment of gratuity scheme to LIC. Non disclosure of income from interest from Bank - HELD THAT:- We observe that the AO has asked the assessee vide order sheet noting to produce reconciliation of all income with its corresponding TDS. However, the assessee has only submitted details of interest receivables in which amount of Rs.12,12,500 from Union Bank of India and Rs. 20,14,546 was not reflected. Accordingly, the AO made addition of above sums and allowed credit of TDS deducted at Rs. 5,24,159. CIT (A), the appellant has failed to furnish any reconciliation of interest received and shown in the books of accounts. In view of this matter, we are not inclined to interfere with order of lower authorities. Accordingly, same is upheld. This ground of appeal is therefore, dismissed.
|