TMI Blog2008 (10) TMI 335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s contributed on the basis of the number of vehicles owned as on the first day on the financial year and to satisfy the legal requirements. The assessee claimed that it had incurred a liability of Rs. 51,12,172 which represented the actual outgoing of the year by way of insurance payment and the assessee had taken into account Rs. 28.88 lakhs which was in the fund and had shown only the balance as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e?" 2. This tax case is squarely covered by the decision in CIT v. Pallavan Transport Corporation Ltd. [1998] 230 ITR 288 (Mad). In fact, that case arose out of I. T. A. Nos. 1257 and 1258 Madras/1978-79 based on which, the order impugned herein has been passed dismissing the appeal of the Revenue. 3. The assessee here is Kattabomman Transport Corporation which is bound by law, as per section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icity Supply Act required the electricity company to set apart a contingency reserve, these monies in the contingency reserve belong to the electricity company and the said amount must be taken into account while determining the business profits of the assessee. Following this, this court held that account of the assessee in this fund are maintained in the books of accounts belonging to the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, what is claimed is deduction of actual revenue expenditure. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that if the asses-see had claimed only the differential between Rs. 51,12,172 and Rs. 28.88 lakhs, and claimed only a sum of Rs. 22,24,712 as actual expenditure, then the assessee would be actually denied the deduction of a sum of Rs. 28 lakhs even on actual payment made. 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
