Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

I.T.O Ward 10 (4) , Kolkata Versus The Bihar Cotton Mills Ltd

2016 (7) TMI 691 - ITAT KOLKATA

Liability in respect of wages - assessee's failure to furnish the details of such miscellaneous liabilities - Held that:- The details of relevant liabilities were not produced by the assessee before AO and the same furnished before CIT(A) for the first time were relied upon by him to give relief to the asessee without giving any opportunity to AO. There is, therefore, violation of Rule 46A and this position is not disputed even by Ld. A/R. We, therefore, set aside the matter to AO. - Additi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

created for the business purpose. Sub-Section (6) of Section 32AB defines that if, said investment reserve is not utilized within the specified time and the same is deemed to be profit and gain of business of that previous year. - In the present case, the said amount appears to be created in the A.Y 1997-78 debiting to the P & L account and there was no dispute that the factory of assessee was taken over by the Bihar State Financial Corporation on 01.04.1981, then the question would arise .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onsideration i.e 2007-08 under Sub-Section (6) of Section 32AB of the Act and the addition under section 41(1) of the Act can not be applied taking into consideration that the assessee was not claimed any deduction in respect of amount ₹ 10,50,000/- under the head investment allowance reserve credited to Profit & Loss account, Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT-A in finding that the addition of amount ₹ 10,50,000/- u/s 41(1) of the Act by the A.O is not justified as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he order of the CIT(A)-XXX, Kolkata in Appeal No. 152/CIT(A)-XXX/Wd-10(1)/2011-12 dated 20-11-2012 for the assessment year 2007-08 against the order of assessment framed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :- 1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the liability of the assessee in respect of wages has not ceased to exist. 2) On the facts and circu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

led on 08-01-2008. 4. During the course of assessment that the assessee has shown liability of ₹ 42,48,307/- under Schedule-7 in audited balance sheet out of which AO found that the ₹ 22,18,360/- as other miscellaneous liabilities. The finding of the AO was that the assessee failed to furnish the details of such miscellaneous liabilities. He added the same by treating it ceased liability. 5. In appeal before the CIT-(A), the assessee submitted that the said liability or miscellaneous .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

prepared as outstanding a copy of which examined and acknowledged by the CIT-A in the course of Appeal proceedings. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT-A has opined as under: 2.2 The submissions of the Appellant have been considered and it is seen that the said liability i.e. miscellaneous liability mentioned by the AO is on account of unpaid wages etc. i.e the prior period expenses the total of which was ₹ 22,18,360/- as on 31-3-2007 and that the details of the same .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n though recovery of any claim wages was barred by limitation, legally debt subsisted and hence there was no cessation of liability. The amount therefore, could not be added to the income. Further the facts in the case of the Appellant wherein it is seen that the liability is towards the workers etc. and is still existing therefore there is no cessation of liability. Accordingly considering the facts in the case of the Appellant and the decision in the above mentioned case laws it is held that t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee, which is against to the procedure contemplated under Rule 46A of the I.T Rules 1962 and prayed to send back the issue to the file of the AO for verification of such details, in turn, the ld.AR of the assessee also submits, in fact, all the details were available before the AO, but could not note down on which date it was filed before the AO. The Ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to page no.3 of the paper book and conceded no objection in remanding the issue to the file of AO for v .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

an amount of ₹ 10,50,000/- under the head investment allowance reserve and. The AO added the same by treating it ceased liability on the ground that the amount of Reserve has not been utilized for acquiring plant & machinery within the period of 8 years from the date of creation and for not filing any evidence by the assessee. 9. On appeal, the CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee held as under:- 3.1 In Appeal it has been submitted that the reserve was created in A. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ons (P) Ltd. in 107 CTR 233. The Appellant also filed photocopy of Audited Accounts for Financial Years 1975- 76 as well as 2006-07 indicating the "Reserve and Surplus" and current liability. 3.2 The submissions of the Appellant have been considered and it is seen that the Reserve in question i.e. the Investment Allowance, Reserve was not created by a deduction or claim in the Profit&' Loss Account. Therefore the addition made by the AO u/s. 41(1) is not justified as the same d .....

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 A.O is not justified because the 'Reserve' was not created by an allowance or deduction in any year in respect of any Loss, Expenditure or Trading Liability incurred by the Appellant. Therefore the addition made by the AO is not justified and the same is deleted (Relief ₹ 10,50,000/-). 10. Before us, the Ld. DR submits that as per section 32A which under dispute is discontinued. It ceased to exist. However, he relied on the order of the AO. The Ld.AR submits that the assessee c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version