9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (4) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax liability arising as a result of the disclosure made by the assessee under the Voluntary date, was a debt owed by the assessee on the respective valuation dates within the meaning of s.2 (m) of the WT Act?" 2. Shri A.K. Ghatak. for the Revenue, contended that the question raised by the Revenue involved the interpretation of the provisions of the WT Act, 1957 and the Voluntary Disclosure Act of 1976. He, therefore, submitted that the same should be referred to the Delhi High Court. 3. Shri N.D. Gupta, the learned Chartered Accountant for the assessee submitted that no question of law arose out of the order of the Tribunal and that the reference applications should be rejected. 4. On a careful consideration of the entire matter, we ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent year, the relevant figures are: Asst. years Accumulated income disclosed Accumulated tax claimed Tax liability allowed as per asst. order 1969-70 2,13,282 1,54,540 5,418.00 1970-71 2,48,682 1,89,263 16,122.00 1971-72 2,64,248 2,02,969 Nil 1972-73 2,84,448 2,19,945 40,341.00 1973-74 3,02,571 2,37,140 12,392.00 1974-75 2,90,000 . . 1975-76 2,90,000 . . 6. Aggrieved by this order, the assessee filed an appeal to the AAC. Before the AAC the assessee submitted that accumulated tax liability should have been allowed as a deduction while determining the net wealth of different years. The AAC followed the order of the Delhi High Court in the case of CWT vs. Girdhari Lal, reported in 99 ITR 79 and directed the WT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment and respectfully following the aforesaid judgment, we would hold that the AAC was justified in giving a direction that the accumulated tax liability should be allowed in different years. The Delhi High Court has specifically dissented from the judgment of Gujarat High Court in CWT vs. Ahmed Ibrahim Sahigara. The judgment of the Kerala High Court was also considered by the Delhi High Court and the reasoning in the case of C.K. Babu Naidu vs. WTO was approved but not the final conclusion. The learned counsel for the assessee referred to the Allahabad High Court decision in the case of CWT vs. B.K. Sharma reported in (110 ITR 902) wherein the aforesaid Judgments of the Gujarat High Court and Kerala High Court have been dissented from and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
