9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 1004 - SC - Income TaxPrincipal requirement for the applicability of Section 41 - whether the assessee must obtain a benefit in respect of a trading liability by way of a remission or cessation thereof? - Held that - The assessee had not been granted the benefit of the said cessation for the Assessment Years in question, the High Court 2010 (6) TMI 18 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT has rightly held that one of the requirements for the applicability of Section 41(1)(a) of the Act had not been fulfilled in the present case. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Interpretation of Section 41(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding remission/cessation of liability for sales tax dues. Analysis: The judgment by the Supreme Court dealt with the interpretation of Section 41(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 concerning the remission or cessation of liability for sales tax dues. The issue arose when the Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction towards sales tax claimed by the assessee, as the tax had not been remitted to the State Government. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal upheld this decision, but the High Court reversed it. The respondent-assessee contended that for Section 41 to apply, there must be a benefit obtained by the assessee due to a remission or cessation of a trading liability. They argued that in this case, there was no cessation of liability regarding sales tax dues, and even if there was, no benefit was obtained. The Sales Tax Tribunal had previously upheld the decision of the assessing authorities, refusing credit to the assessee for payment made to SICOM. The High Court accepted this contention, stating that there was no remission or cessation of liability based on the tribunal's order and the notice of demand issued. The High Court correctly concluded that the assessee did not receive the benefit of cessation for the relevant Assessment Years, thus not fulfilling the requirements for Section 41(1)(a) to apply. Consequently, the Supreme Court found no error in the High Court's decision and dismissed the appeals for lacking merit.
|
