9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ORDER PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal of the Revenue is directed against an order dated 25.02.2016 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai. Its grievance is that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted an addition of ?2,20,63,819/- made by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.41(1) r.w.s 28(iv) of the Act. 2. Revenue h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al scheme, to pay the deferred tax in one lumpsum at the discounted rate of 8%. In other words it allowed premature payments of the due amounts at a sum discounted at the rate of 8%. Assessee availed this scheme and against the deferred tax of ?5,79,43,346/- for the period 1.4.2006 to 31.08.2007, it made actual payment of ?3,58,79,527/-, taking advantage of the 8% discounting. In other words, asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax (Appeals) submitted that similar issue was decided in favour of the Revenue by the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Thirumalaiswamy Naidu & Sons 230 ITR 534 and Polyflex (India) Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT 257 ITR 343. 6. Per contra, the ld. Authorised Representative strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 7. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for giving relief to the assessee read as under:- ''12. In the instant case, as per the scheme he was allowed to retain the sales tax as determined by the competent authority and pay the same 15 years thereafter. The tax collected was deemed to have been paid and, therefore, the tax so collected cannot be construed as income in the hands of the assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pay tax. Under these circumstances, we do not see any error committed by the Tribunal in passing the impugned order. The substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue''. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was justified in giving relief sought by the assessee. We do not find any reason to interfere. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
