TMI Blog1978 (2) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... referred the following question of law for our opinion: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 20,40,721 on account of provision for taxation and Rs. 19,66,853 on account of proposed dividend were to be included in the computation of capital under the Super Profits Tax Act, 1963 ?" The previous year relevant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of a Bench of this court in CIT v. Security Printers of India (P.) Ltd. [1972] 86 ITR 210 (All) as being directly in point. Accordingly, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and directed that both these amounts be treated as "reserve" and so, as part of the assessee's capital for computing the capital under the Act. The decision of this court in CIT v. Security Printers of India (P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e revenue that the amounts represented liabilities which had already arisen and were not intended for future use in a future contingency. It is in that context that the decision in that case has to be appreciated. Subsequently, in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Hind Lamps Ltd. [1973] 90 ITR 487 (All) the same court held that sums representing proposed dividends and provision for taxation could not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect of taxation can be treated as a "reserve" only to the extent that it exceeds the tax liability which had already accrued on April 30, 1962. Similarly, about the provision for dividends, it will have to be seen as to how the assessee conducted itself in the matter of deciding upon the dividends which were payable for the year. In the absence of findings on these crucial aspects, the questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
