9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 893X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r but in future years - But this benefit cannot be related to any asset as such - the interest paid by the assesee for the purpose of borrowing money for payment to the workers, would also amount to a business expenditure – Decided against Revenue. - ITA No. 128 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 11-4-2014 - Girish Chandra Gupta And Sudip Ahluwalia,JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. Smita Das De For the Respondent : Ms. Anupa Banerjee ORDER The Court: The only question argued by Ms. Smita Das De, learned advocate appearing for the appellant is the question No. 1 which reads as follows : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowing deduction of payment of Rs.1,08,41 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olutely wanting. Facts on record, mode of computation of total income in assessment and treatment of the accounts and the different items of expenditure run counter to the conclusion drawn in rejecting claim for allowance of deduction in respect of payment of compensation to workers under the Voluntary Separation scheme. Accordingly it is held that there is no case for disallowance of any part of the expenditure of Rs.1,08,41,068/-. The revenue unsuccessfully challenged the order before the learned Tribunal which was dismissed with the following observations : We agree with the contention of the CIT (A) that the expenses towards payment of VSB made to the workers was incurred not only in connection with the existing business of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther in the backdrop of the aforesaid factual situation, payments made by the assessee to his workers by way of compensation can be treated to be an expenditure otherwise than in the nature of revenue, is the sole question. Ms. Anupa Banerjee, learned advocate who was appointed amicus curiae by us drew our attention to a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of C.I.T. Vs. Assam Oil Co. Ltd. reported in 154 ITR 647 wherein the question of determination was as follows : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payment of Rs.30,96,805 as retrenchment compensation to the employees of the company could be allowed as a deduction by holding it to be a revenue expenditure? The aforesaid question was ans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion under section 37(1) of the Act. Ms. Banerjee submitted that she has cited this judgment only to take care of a passing remark made by the Assessing Officer that after closing down the manufacturing activity the assessee had started business of letting out the factory for warehousing purpose. She contended that even in that case, although this was not the case of the revenue either before the C.I.T. or before the Tribunal, it cannot be said that the business of the assessee had come to an end. The submissions made by Ms. Das De have thus been duly dealt with and the question formulated above, is answered in favour of the assessee. Needless to point out that in view of the answer given to the question formulated above, it has to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
