9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's decision allowing the assessee's claim for bifurcation of receipts on account of administrative charges and commission over the period of hire-purchase duration. Analysis: The case involved the U. P. State Agro Industrial Corporation Limited, which purchased goods for hire-purchase and distributed discount, profits, and administrative charges over the hire-purchase period. The Corporation sold goods at full value to farmers, including administrative charges, payable over 3 to 7 years. The main issue was the justification of distributing administrative charges and discount over the hire-purchase period. The Court found that the Corporation did not realize the discount amount immediately but over time with instalment payments, similar to profit. Thus, distributing the discount over the hire-purchase duration was deemed justified. Regarding administrative charges, the Income-tax Officer viewed it as charges for legal formalities, while the Tribunal interpreted it to cover various expenses over the hire-purchase period, including recovery expenses and legal proceedings. The Tribunal's interpretation was accepted, allowing the Corporation to spread administrative charges over the hire-purchase duration. Had the charges been solely for legal formalities, the outcome might have differed. However, as per the Tribunal's understanding, the distribution of administrative charges over the hire-purchase term was deemed permissible. Consequently, the question was answered in favor of the assessee, ruling against the Revenue without costs.
|
