9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of Power & Fuel expenditure of Rs. 1,57,000. 2. Disallowance of vehicle expenses of Rs. 3,000. Detailed Analysis: 1. Disallowance of Power & Fuel Expenditure of Rs. 1,57,000: The assessee, a company, appealed against the disallowance of Rs. 1,57,000 for Power & Fuel expenses for the assessment year 1975-76. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) added back this amount to the total income, citing that the expenses included a disputed balance (D.B.) of Rs. 57,000 and an estimated provision of Rs. 1,00,000, which were not related to the year of account. During the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT (A)], the assessee argued that the amount of Rs. 57,000 was paid under protest to the Assam State Electricity Board (ASEB) during the accounting period 1973-74 and was not claimed in the previous assessment year. They further contended that after prolonged litigation, a court decision on 3rd June 1975 mandated payments to ASEB, which included a deposit of Rs. 50,000 and subsequent monthly instalments of Rs. 15,000. The assessee claimed that the difference of Rs. 96,288.44 between the amounts due as of April 1974 and April 1975 fell within the relevant accounting period and justified a provision of Rs. 1,00,000. The CIT (A) rejected this argument, stating that the liability arose only on 3rd June 1975, per the court's direction, which was outside the relevant accounting period. Thus, the disallowance by the ITO was upheld. In the second appeal, the assessee reiterated their argument, emphasizing that the liability existed during the relevant accounting period and cited the Supreme Court decision in Kedar Nath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (Central), Calcutta (88 ITR 363) to support their claim. The assessee also withdrew their claim regarding the Rs. 57,000 disputed balance. The Departmental Representative argued that the actual expenses were allowed, and the disallowance of the opening balance and estimated provision was justified as they did not relate to the year of account. The onus was on the assessee to prove the claim, which they failed to do. Upon review, it was noted that the bills from ASEB covered periods within the relevant accounting year. The Tribunal concluded that the liability existed during the accounting period, even though it became legally enforceable later. The expenditure should be allowed in the year it arose, following the mercantile system of accounting. However, since part of the period in the bills did not fall within the relevant accounting year, the case was remanded to the ITO to allow the deduction for the amount related to the relevant accounting period, not exceeding Rs. 96,288.44. 2. Disallowance of Vehicle Expenses of Rs. 3,000: The assessee did not press this ground during the appeal. Consequently, the orders of the lower authorities disallowing the vehicle expenses of Rs. 3,000 were upheld. Conclusion: The appeal was partly allowed. The ITO was directed to recompute the total income of the assessee for the assessment year under appeal, allowing the deduction for Power & Fuel expenses to the extent it related to the relevant accounting period, not exceeding Rs. 96,288.44. The disallowance of vehicle expenses of Rs. 3,000 was upheld.
|
