TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s deposited with the Registrar of High Court during the year under consideration and the balance amount of ₹ 2,40,56,079/- was deposited with the Registrar on 26.08.2014. The incurring of expenditure is not in doubt and genuineness of the claim is not in dispute - the amount that was paid during the year under consideration i.e. ₹ 5.28 crore (rounded off) be allowed as an expense in the year under consideration and the balance amount of ₹ 2.40 crore (rounded off) which was deposited with the Registrar High Court be allowed as deduction in A.Y. 2015-16. Thus the claim of the assessee is allowed. - ITA No. 61/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 25-8-2021 - SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. KULDIP SINGH , JUDICIAL MEM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar course of business pending on the balance sheet date, the impugned disallowance is illegal, arbitrary and in total disregard to settled accounting principles. (iii) In any case, in absence of any dispute regarding genuineness and correctness of claim of business loss, there is no case of any disallowance as per settled legal and accounting principles. 2. In the alternative, the assessing officer may be directed to allow the claim in the succeeding year i.e. AY 2015-16 3. That the order of lower authorities is not sustainable on facts and same is bad in law. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any or all of the grounds as may be necessary and in the interest of justice. 4. Before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etal amount to the Registrar of Delhi High Court. Thereafter, Hon ble Delhi High Court vide Judgement dated 30.05.2014 modified the award to ₹ 1,83,24,906.39 plus interest @ 9.17% p.a. till the date of the decree and 10% future simple interest. The Hon ble High Court also imposed a cost of ₹ 75,000/- on the assessee. The amount directed by the Hon ble High Court was deposited with the High Court. AO noted that assessee has debited the Profit and Loss account on the basis of the decision of Delhi High Court dated 30.05.2014 which falls in Financial Year 2014-15 and not in the impugned assessment year. He also noted that as per the details furnished by assessee, the decision of providing the amount of compensation by the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tandard - 4 issued by Institute of Chartered Accountant of India which mandated the assessee to recognize the liability before the finalization of Balance Sheet. He further submitted that the genuineness of the claim being not in dispute and considering the fact that entire sum was paid to the Registrar. AO was not justified in disallowing the expenses. He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Rotork Controls India (P.) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Incometax [2009] 314 ITR 62 (SC) Bharat Earth Movers v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2000] 245 ITR 428 (SC). He further submitted that disallowance is merely on account of timing difference and as such the same is of academic nature having no adverse Revenue implic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is also an undisputed fact that the payment of the aforesaid amount arose on account of the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court which was pronounced on 30.05.2014. It is also an undisputed fact that out of the total compensation amount of ₹ 5,28,80,795/- was deposited with the Registrar of High Court during the year under consideration and the balance amount of ₹ 2,40,56,079/- was deposited with the Registrar on 26.08.2014. The incurring of expenditure is not in doubt and genuineness of the claim is not in dispute. Considering the totality of the aforesaid facts we are of the view that to the extent, the amount that was paid during the year under consideration i.e. ₹ 5.28 crore (rounded off) be allowed as an expense in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
