TMI Blog1998 (9) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the assessee and for the Department on more days than one, and although authorities were cited on both sides, yet, in our opinion, the matter is of such utter simplicity that it can be disposed of in a very brief compass. The questions relate to admissibility of deductions of two several sums of Rs. 1,23,695 and Rs. 2,06,589 paid by the assessee on account of purchase tax during the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sum is actually paid by him. It is also provided in the section, prior to the provisos, that for later years, the deduction shall be allowed in computing the income only in the previous year in which the sum representing tax, duty, cess or fee is actually paid by the assessee. In regard to the sum of Rs. 1,23,695 the assessee has been successful from the beginning. In regard to the second sum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ught to be remanded for examination as to how the matters had been dealt with by the assessee, in the relevant books, irrespective of the fact that the assessee had paid the total sum of Rs. 3,30,284 in the assessment year in question in which deduction was claimed in regard thereto on the basis of the then introduced section 43B. Very simply put, our opinion is that there is no part of this sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... books of the assessee in regard to this total sum of Rs. 3,30,284. They also made an error of law in seeking to remand that part of the order which had come before them, if we might use the expression, unchallenged after appeal. Accordingly, both the questions are answered in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal was not correct in directing consideration afresh of the entire payment of Rs. 3,30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
