9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee service provided - Held that:- Quantification of the provision as done on the basis of the unencashed valid coupons was on a reasonable and consistent basis - the provision is of a estimate and if subsequently the same is found to be in excess then the excess is added back and offered to tax. Further, this has been a practice followed by the respondent assessee and accepted by the department for many years - against revenue. Depreciation in respect of telephone trolleys, furniture and equipment as plant and machinery in factory - Held that:- The issue is settled by the Tribunal in the earlier year in respect of the same assessee and the revenue has not been able to point out any change in the circumstances. Appeal admitted only on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal was justified in directing the A.O. to consider the assessee's claim of expenditure amounting to Rs.9,15,431/- which were not claimed in the return of income and not applying the ratio Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India Ltd., 284 ITR 323 to the present case? iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in not appreciating the provisions of Sec.43B of the Income Tax Act and in ignoring the clear language of the Section 43B as per which any expenditure has to be otherwise allowable before applying the provisions of Section-43B.? v) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs.17,52,545/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e revenue. Therefore, there is no reason why the renewal membership fees paid by the assessee should not be allowed as revenue expenditure. Consequently, no substantial question of law arises and Question (i) is dismissed. Regarding Question (iii): 4) In this case the Tribunal has merely remanded the matter to the Assessing officer to decide the issue. Consequently, at this point of time, no substantial question of law arises. Therefore, Question (iii) is dismissed. Regarding Question (iv): 5) The question as framed is in the form of submissions in support of Question No.(ii). It therefore, does not raise any independent question much less a substantial question of law for consideration. Regarding Question (v) and (vi): 6) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal found that quantification of the provision as done on the basis of the unencashed valid coupons was on a reasonable and consistent basis. Further, such practice has been followed consistently over several years. Therefore, the provision made by the respondent assessee satisfied the test laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of Rotork Controls India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 314 ITR Page 62 wherein the Court observed that a provision is a liability which can be measured by using a substantial degree of estimation. As held by the Apex Court a provision is recognized when a) an enterprise has a present obligation as a result of a past event; (b) it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required to settle the obligation, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
