2013 (6) TMI 97

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent : Mr. Vishal Mohan with Mr. Rattan Thakur, Advocates. ORDER Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, C.J. (Oral) Heard counsel for the parties. 2. These appeals have been filed by the Department on the assertion that it raises substantial question of law as follows:- "Whether the provision made by the assessee for leave encashment is not an ascertained liability and is thus liable to be added to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce to be paid to the employees. Consistent with that finding, the Appellate Tribunal, relying on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Bharat Earth Movers versus Commissioner of Income Tax (2000) 245 ITR 428 allowed the appeal and was pleased to set aside the assessment order to the extent disallowing the amount towards leave allowance to be paid to the employees. The Appellate Tribunal al .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ability is not a contingent one. The liability is in praesenti though it will be discharged at a future date. It does not make any difference if the future date on which the liability shall have to be discharged is not certain." (Emphasis supplied) 3. The argument of the appellant that the finding recorded by the Tribunal is in-appropriate, cannot be the basis to admit these appeals and, moreso, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X