9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (12) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the due date for filing the return under section 139(1) read with the first proviso to section 43B. – Tribunal upheld the order of Commissioner – no infirmity in Tribunal’s order - - - - - Dated:- 13-12-2002 - Judge(s) : S. SANKARASUBBAN., KUM. A. LEKSHMIKUTTY. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by S. SANKARASUBBAN J. - This income-tax appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in I.T.A. No. 843 (Cochin) of 1990 dated December 8, 2000. The relevant assessment year is 1992-93. The assessee, M/s. Chackolas Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd., is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of yarn. For the assessment year 1992-93, the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the mercantile system and in the account an amount of Rs. 12,81,108 was not included. The agreement for bonus was made only in December, 1992, much after the previous year and the liability arise only when the agreement was executed and hence, the entire amount of bonus paid could not be included for the year 1991-92. On the other hand, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the amount was paid before the return was filed and the agreement shows that the bonus was for the period 1991-92 and hence, the Tribunal was correct in excluding the entire amount paid as bonus. During the course of hearing, a copy of memorandum of settlement entered into between employer and workmen was produced before us. Condition No.1 in the terms of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es. The decision of the Rajasthan High Court reported in CIT v. Premier Vegetable Products [1997] 227 ITR 931, is apt so far as this case is concerned. In the above decision, it was held as follows: "The assessee made provision for payment of bonus at the rate of 24 per cent., on the basis of an agreement dated April 2, 1974. The Income-tax Officer took the view that the liability for payment of increased rate of bonus arose during the next year and not for the assessment year 1974-75 and since there was no liability for payment of bonus in excess of the maximum payable under the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, he rejected the claim of the assessee for deduction of Rs. 15,003 on account of provision for bonus. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
