Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Maken Cement Industries, Kathua Versus Commissioner of Income Tax And Another

2015 (4) TMI 515 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

Taxability of Transport subsidy - method of accounting - accrual of income - ITAT has fallen in error in holding that the transport subsidy amounting to ₹ 16,11,477/- which was never received by the assessee and for which merely a claim was lodged with the Jammu & Kashmir Government could be treated as income accrued and taxed in the hand of the assessee? - Held that:- Tribunal allowed the appeal of the revenue whereby the CIT had given the benefit of ₹ 16,11,480/- on account of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd sought exemption. It had never taken the plea before the authorities below which is now sought to be raised that it was only liable to be assessed to the tune of ₹ 5,17,123/- which was actually received in the year concerned. As noticed neither was the certificate filed from the concerned General Manager, District Industries Centre when the return was filed on 31.3.2002. The certificate was only obtained for the subsequent period and therefore, it was never only the case of the assessee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Dated:- 6-4-2015 - S. J. Vazifdar, ACJ And Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia,JJ. For the Appellants : Ms Radhika Suri, Sr. Adv. & Ms Rajni Paul, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr Dinesh Goyal Adv. JUDGMENT G. S. Sandhawalia,J. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") against the order dated 8.11.2012 (Annexure A/4) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r Government could be treated as income accrued and taxed in the hand of the assessee?" Learned senior counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the above said amount was never received by the assessee and therefore it could not be treated as income in the hands of the assessee and placed reliance upon the Transport Subsidy Scheme, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Scheme") circulated by the Jammu & Kashmir Development Finance Corporation Limited (hereinafter re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eas. (ii) xxx xxx xxx (iii) xxx xxx xxx (iv) xxx xxx xxx (v) xxx xxx xxx (vi) xxx xxx xxx (vii) + Freight charges for movement by road/sea will be determined on the basis of transport/transshipment rates fixed by the Central Government/State Government/Union Territory Administration concerned from time to time or the actual freight paid, whichever is less." Accordingly, it was contended that once only a sum of ₹ 5,17,123/- had been received out of ₹ 21,18,637/-, balance of ͅ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the appeal of the revenue. Counsel for the revenue on the other hand has submitted that this was neither the case of the assessee before the Tribunal as such nor before the assessing authority rather the benefit of Section 80-IB of the Act had been sought. Nil return had been filed and on re-opening after recording reasons by the assessing authority, the assessment order had been passed on 4.12.2009(Annexure A/2) and it had been noticed that the assessee had been adopting mercantile system of ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

received. A perusal of the paper-book would go on to show that no certificate as such was obtained from the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Kathua for the year in question i.e. 2002-03. The return had been filed on 30.10.2002 and had been duly processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 27.1.2003. It was noticed that transport subsidy had been received by the assessee from the Corporation which had not been declared as income and the case was re-opened on 16.7.2008. Thereafter, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

80-IB that the assessee was not eligible for deduction since the receipt of transport subsidy did not fall in the category of direct source of profit but was any other profit. However, the CIT granted the benefit of a sum of ₹ 16,11,480/- on account of the fact that it had not been received by the assessee and therefore, need not be taxed at the hands of the assessee. Two appeals were filed before the Tribunal by both the parties. On the basis of consensus arrived at, that benefit of reba .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the concerned assessment year and had adopted the mercantile system of accounting. It had credited subsidy receivable on 21.3.2002 and therefore, it was considered to be received on the said date. Accordingly, the appeal of the revenue was allowed. Thus, it would be apparent that the assessee apart from adopting mercantile system of accounting had chosen to take benefit of Section 80-IB of the Act and sought exemption. It had never taken the plea before the authorities below which is now sought .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version