Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 39 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 43B - additional charges and interest payable to the A.P. State Electricity Board for the delayed payment of consumption charges - whether it does not fall within the purview of fee and hence it is deductable as expenditure notwithstanding non-remittance of the same before the date stipulated U/s.43B ? - HELD THAT:- This issue is squarely covered by a decision of this Court reported in CIT v. Andhra Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. [2013 (2) TMI 530 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT]. In the said decision, a Division Bench of this Court had examined the contours of Section 43B and held that non-payment of such disputed electricity charges to the APSEB cannot be termed as ‘fees’ and that the Revenue has to give deduction to the said amount. Tribunal while allowing the Appeal held that the electricity charges partake the nature of statutory liability and accordingly will have to be allowed as deduction irrespective of whether or not the same has been paid and notwithstanding that the assessee has disputed any liability to pay any part of such charges. Section 43B of the Act does not speak about the electricity charges. Nowhere it is mentioned in the Section or proviso to it that unpaid electricity charges are not deductable. Revenue cannot interpret the provisions of Section 43B of the Act in its favour, since the provisions of Section do not incorporate the electricity charges - such electricity charges are in the nature of statutory liability and the Revenue has to allow them as deduction irrespective of whether or not the same has been paid and notwithstanding that the assessee has disputed any liability to pay any part of such charges. Assessee entitled to grant of deduction of the expenditure not having been recorded in the books of accounts much less claimed as a deduction in the return under the I.T. Act - HELD THAT:- As the issue was settled by the Supreme Court in National Thermal Power Company Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax [1996 (12) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] which was explained by the Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT]. This issue cropped up again before the Supreme Court in Wipro Finance Limited v. CIT [2022 (4) TMI 694 - SUPREME COURT] wherein it has been clarified that there is no bar for an assessee to set up a fresh claim before the Tribunal though such a bar may operate against the revenue.
|