9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 673X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 21.4.2010 passed by the ld. first appellate authority, Bhopal. 2. The revenue is aggrieved by the impugned order on the ground that the ld. first appellate authority erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 28,40,000/- made on account of premium paid on Government securities whereas the assessee is aggrieved in not allowing deduction of provisions for cadre staff salary u/s 43B of the Act to the extent paid before filing of return of income. 3. In the cross appeal of the revenue, the crux of arguments on behalf of the revenue is in support of the assessment order whereas the learned counsel for the assessee defended the impugned order. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on file. Br ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r as the cross appeal filed by the assessee is concerned, the assessee is aggrieved in not allowing deduction u/s 43B of the Act of provisions for cadre staff salary to the extent paid before filing the return of income is concerned, we find that any actual payment before filing of return/before due date is an allowable/deductible expenditure u/s 43B(b) of the Act. The assessee made provision in respect of cadre staff salary. The part of the provision was paid as salary to the employees concerned before filing the return. It is also not in dispute that the amount was debited to profit and loss account, therefore, the part of the salary which was paid to the employees before filing of return of income is an allowable deduction. The ratio lai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng to ₹ 1,01,03,180/- were defective, therefore, the assessee was asked to get the same amended. As per the revenue, either the certificates were not issued in the name of the assessee or these certificates contained no names at all, also the date of deposit and voucher number, etc. were not given. The assessee submitted the corrected certificates again on 22nd March, 1998. Vide order u/s 143(3)/154 dated 23rd July, 1998 the assessee was given credits of these TDS certificates and refund of ₹ 1,11,20,816/- was issued to the assessee along with interest. 8. Subsequently it was found that the assessee was allowed refund in excess in view of the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 244A of the Act. As the interest u/s 244A o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -. This stand of the Assessing Officer was affirmed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 9. Under the aforementioned facts, now the question arises whether the order dated 8.2.2002 passed u/s 154 of the Act is an appealable order As pointed out by the learned counsel for the assessee, the Tribunal has already deliberated upon this issue vide order dated 8.2.2008 wherein it is clear that the Assessing Officer was directed to pass the order u/s 154 of the Act by taking recourse to the provisions contained u/s 244A (2) of the Act. So far as recourse u/s 244A(2) of the Act is concerned, a direction was sought by the Assessing Officer from the learned CCIT or the CIT as the case may be. However, the fact remains that the order was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
