9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... construction cost credited by the assessee in its accounts should be excluded from the net profit as per books which is computed as per Part II and Part III of Schedule VI to Companies Act on the ground that no income can be included in the “book profit” under section 115JA based on mere book entries? - Decision of ITAT sustained. VRS payment of Rs.27.92 crores, made to workers for closure of factory - It is pertinent to note that before the Tribunal, the appellant had not contended that the decision of this Court in the matter of Commissioner of Income-Tax Versus Bhor Industries Ltd.( 2003 (2) TMI 20 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) is inapplicable to the present facts in fact, in it's appeal to the Tribunal the appellant-Revenue had urged that Bh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss and as per agreement with workers dated 15.12.1997 as submitted by the assessee before the CIT ( A) ? 3. Mr. Singh, however, sought to raise another ground and a further question of law to the effect that the respondent had not proved the payment under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme. He submitted that this issue was dealt with by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), but not by the Tribunal. 4. As rightly pointed out by Mr. Jasani , the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, this question of fact viz. whether the payments had been made under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme had been raised unnecessarily by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Assessing Officer had not disallowed the same on this ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th an intention to develop mill land, was a revenue expenditure ? (D) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble I.T.A.T. was right in holding that ratio of the decision in the case of Bhor Industries Limited, 264 ITR 180 (Bom) is applicable in this case without appreciating that in the case of Bhor Industries (264 ITR 180) , VRS payment was made to save on expenses and not for closing down the factory with a motive to develop the mill land as is the fact in the present case ? (E) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble I.T.A.T. was right in holding that the extraordinary items in the form of Rs.30 crores representing profit on transfer of land f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the said decision. Further, in view thereof, we had, by an order dated 7th August, 2012, dismissed ITA No.5249 of 2010 in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Swan Mills Limited (i.e. the same respondent) . Re: Question (D): 11. Mr. Singh submitted that the judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bhor Industries Limited, (2003) 264 ITR 180 would not apply to the present case as in that case, the scheme was propounded with a view to saving expenses, whereas in the present case it was propounded with a view to closing down the factory and developing the property. Mr. Jasani , however, submitted that the development of the premises took place in the subsequent assessment years and not in the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
