9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of 1/5th out of car expenses for personal use by the Director. 2. Disallowance under section 37(3A). 3. Treatment of the amount of Rs. 13,48,215 as income under section 41(1) of the Act. 4. Disallowance of Rs. 41,192 under section 40A(3) of the Act. 5. Non-allowance of deduction of sales tax outstanding on 30th June, 1984, under section 43B of the Act. Detailed Analysis: 1. Disallowance of 1/5th out of Car Expenses for Personal Use by the Director: The assessee did not press this issue during the hearing, and accordingly, this ground was treated as dismissed. 2. Disallowance under Section 37(3A): Similar to the car expenses issue, this ground was also not pressed during the hearing and was treated as dismissed. 3. Treatment of Rs. 13,48,215 as Income under Section 41(1) of the Act: The primary issue debated was whether the amount of Rs. 13,48,215, which represented a provision for interest on public deposits written back to the Profit & Loss Account, should be treated as income under section 41(1) of the Act. - Facts and Background: The Assessing Officer considered the write-back of interest as income, treating it as similar to a bonus provided and written back. The CIT(A) upheld this view, noting that the liability was contingent and not certain, referencing the High Court's compromise order. - High Court Compromise Order: The Delhi High Court approved a scheme of compromise or arrangement, which included specific directions on the payment of interest and principal to depositors. The scheme was binding on all parties involved, including the unsecured creditors, depositors, and the company. - Assessee's Argument: The assessee argued that the liability to pay interest continued to exist and had not ceased. The write-back was a unilateral action to present a better financial picture and did not result in any actual income. The assessee cited several case laws to support the argument that a mere write-back, without remission by the creditors, does not constitute income under section 41(1). - Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal concluded that the liability to pay interest continued to subsist as there was no evidence of remission by the depositors. The write-back was a unilateral action and did not result in cessation of liability. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 13,48,215 could not be treated as income under section 41(1) of the Act. The Tribunal deleted the inclusion as income. 4. Disallowance of Rs. 41,192 under Section 40A(3) of the Act: The dispute was regarding the disallowance of expenses incurred by the staff on traveling, which were reimbursed in cash. - Assessee's Argument: The assessee argued that the expenses were incurred by the employees as agents of the company on a day-to-day basis, and each expense item was less than Rs. 2,500. Therefore, these should not be disallowed under section 40A(3). - Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, noting that the employees acted as agents of the company, and the expenses incurred were individual items, not to be clubbed together. The reimbursement of expenses was not the same as incurring the expenses. Therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 41,192 was deleted. 5. Non-allowance of Deduction of Sales Tax Outstanding on 30th June, 1984, under Section 43B of the Act: The issue was the non-allowance of deduction for sales tax outstanding as of 30th June, 1984. - Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal upheld the disallowance based on the jurisdictional High Court decisions in Sanghi Motors v. Union of India and Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India. However, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction in the year of actual payment. Conclusion: The appeal was allowed in part, with the Tribunal providing relief on the issues of the write-back of interest and the disallowance under section 40A(3) while upholding the disallowance under section 43B with directions for future allowance.
|
