TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 539X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... high court. We observe that this plea does not form a valid ground to adopt a different action in the present case. The CIT(Appeals)’s findings are affirmed. - Decided against revenue Disallowance of safety bonus claim - CIT(A) deleted disallowance - Held that:- CIT(Appeals) has followed the tribunal’s decision for the assessment years 2001-02 to 2007-08 in deleting the impugned disallowance of safety bonuses written off as per Actuarial valuation. The Revenue neither draws any distinction on facts nor does it quote any case law to the contrary directly covering the issue. We follow consistency in these circumstances and reject the Revenue’s arguments. - Decided against revenue. - ITA Nos.2957 & 2958/Mds/2014 - - - Dated:- 11-3-2015 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 31.03.2008. It had enrolled members and received one time membership fee; refundable and non- refundable. The relevant membership tenure was 3/5/8 years from the date of enrollment. The assessee would insure its members with insurance companies against accidents. It recognized only 1/8th of receipt of membership fees as income of relevant previous year. There is no dispute that the CIT(Appeals) and the tribunal have already upheld the very method of recognition of income in earlier assessment year. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee s practice and observed that the Revenue had not accepted the aforesaid appellate orders. He considered the entire membership fees as its income to be assessed in the impugned assessment year inst ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the impugned assessment year are pari materia and nothing has been brought on record by the revenue to show any decision of any higher judicial authority which would warrant a different view. We thus find no error In the order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, ground Nos.2 3 of the revenue stand dismissed We also find from the order of the CIT(Appeals) that he had made a bifurcation of refundable fees and non-refundable fees before allowing relief to the assessee. With regard to the contention of the learned O.R. that amortization was not considered in the order of the Tribunal of the earlier year, we are of the opinion that the Revenue if it was agitated, should have taken remedies available under the statutes, against the order of the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in the end of the membership period in case the member concerned did not raise any claim. The Assessing Officer did not agree and disallowed / added the safety bonus claim sum of ₹ 1,24,76,016/-. 8. The lower appellate authority has accepted the assessee s ground raised, as under:- 7.2 After considering the appellant s submissions, as per the membership scheme, the appellant has to give back the membership fee collected as Safety Bonus during the end of the membership period, if there had been no claim by the member during he membership period. This liability for payment of Safety Bonus extends to the entire period of membership i.e., 8 years. The Bonus liability has been quantified on the basis of Actual Valua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rkings given by the appellant is annexed as Annexure B to this order. The Assessing Officer is directed to allow ₹ 3,95,87,354/- as Safety Bonus liability for the assessment year 2008-09. 9. Heard both sides. Record perused. We find that the CIT(Appeals) has followed the tribunal s decision in deleting the impugned disallowance of safety bonuses written off. The Revenue neither draws any distinction on facts nor does it quote any case law to the contrary directly covering the issue. We follow consistency in these circumstances and reject the Revenue s arguments. I.T.A. No. 2957/Mds/2014 is dismissed. I.T.A. No. 2958/Mds/2014 (Assessment Year 2009-10) 10. The Revenue s pleadings in this appeal are identical to those d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
