TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1529X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use the MACT awards are booked by the assessee at a later point of time than the date of the award cannot be reason enough to decline the claim for deduction in respect of these awards. It is sometimes possible, rather its inherent mechanism of the system as it exists, that sometimes there is considerable delay in communicating the awards granted by MACT. The awards are generally conveyed through the lawyers representing the assessee and it does take time in many cases. It is not the case of the AO that the subsequent claims are duplication of claims in respect of the same liability, and the assessee does not stand to gain as a result of this delay in accounting. In any event, the quantification of claims is verified by the statutory aud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y interference. When an assessee is dealing with such a huge volume of diesel and CNG, as the assessee before us, it is quite understandable that there can be some loss by way of evaporation and in the process of distributing the diesel and CNG to the motor vehicles. This loss has been certified by the auditors as well. It is also not the case of the Assessing Officer that the loss is excessive or unreasonable. In view of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we approve the conclusions arrived at by the CIT(A) and decline to interfere in the matter. - I.T.A. No.1192/Ahd/2014 - - - Dated:- 28-4-2017 - Pramod Kumar AND Mahavir Prasad , JJ. Appellant: Jagdish Respondent: Sunil Talati ORDER Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the learned counsel of the assessee. These grounds have to be, therefore, allowed. Of course, as learned counsel rightly submits, this does stand of the assessee does not prejudice, or acts to the detriment of assessee s right to carry the matter, if so advised, before the higher forums. 4. Ground nos. 2 and 4 are thus allowed 5. In ground no. 1, the assessee has raised the following grievance: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 41,44,80,439/- made on account of motor accident claims of earlier years, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record, 6. So far as this grievance of the Assessing Officer is concerned, the relevant mater ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the liability takes time to get crystallized and all these claims became due only in this assessment year and were accordingly honoured. The accounts of the appellant were audited by C AG of India and there has certified the amount of ₹ 414480439/- which has been claimed during the assessment year under consideration. It has been further submitted by the appellant that no provision is being made as the same cannot be done merely on the basis of claims made by the parties or routes five by the court by dead or injured parties/related is due to accidents. The liabilities are therefore, crystallized; made known and debited in the books only when awards/orders of the court are received from the advocates. Accordingly, it has been submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT(A), the Assessing Officer is in appeal before us. 8. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position. 9. We find that merely because the MACT awards are booked by the assessee at a later point of time than the date of the award cannot be reason enough to decline the claim for deduction in respect of these awards. It is sometimes possible, rather its inherent mechanism of the system as it exists, that sometimes there is considerable delay in communicating the awards granted by MACT. The awards are generally conveyed through the lawyers representing the assessee and it does take time in many cases. It is not the case of the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parts, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record. 12. So far as this ground of appeal is concerned, the relevant material facts are as follows. During the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee claimed a shortage of stock of ₹ 31,77,322. When this issue was probed, it was explained by the assessee that during the relevant previous year, the assessee has consumed diesel for ₹ 592.18 crores and CNG worth ₹ 67.04 crores, and the inherent nature of these products is such that there is scope for evaporation of diesel and CNG. However, the Assessing Officer rejected this explanation and proceeded to make a disallowance of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
