9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (9) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venience facts have been taken from IT Appeal No. 40 of 2004. 3. The assessee, a limited company, had filed return for asst. yr. 1991-92 on 31st Dec., 1990 disclosing income of Rs. nil. However, the income chargeable to tax under s. 115J was shown at ₹ 57,430. The assessment was framed under s. 143(3) on 30th Sept., 1996 including total income at nil. However, on scrutiny of the case records it was noticed that liability for sales-tax amounting to ₹ 2,45,813 was deducted to P L a/c and claimed as deduction but the payment thereof was not made but was claimed to be covered under sales-tax deferment scheme of the Government. The assessment was reopened under s. 147 vide notice under s. 148 dt. 29th March, 1995 to disallow the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have availed deferment facility of tax under the provisions of s. 22D of the M.P. General Sales-tax Act. The contention raised is that s. 43B contemplates actual payment before deduction of the amount is claimed. In this connection the learned counsel have invited attention to para 4 which states that the matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Law and the various State Governments. The Ministry of Law has opined that if the State Governments make an amendment in the Sales-tax Act to the effect that the sales-tax deferred under the scheme shall be treated as actually paid, such deeming provision will meet the requirement of s. 43B. Accordingly, the State Government amended the M.P.General Sales-tax Act and s. 22 provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the assessee was entitled to retain the sales-tax collected from customers for a period of ten years and for the purposes of the Sales-tax Act and also for the purposes of s. 43B of the Act the amount shall be deemed to have been paid. Thus, the sum and substance of the above circulars was that not only the provision made or amendment of s. 22D and incorporating sub-s. (3B) and s. 22, even as per the earlier decision of the Court in CIT vs. K.N. Oil Industries (supra) there was deeming provision with regard to the payment of tax for the purposes of conversion of s. 43B of the IT Act. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal did not err in deleting the addition made by the subordinate authorities. We are, therefore, of the view that am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
