9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 74X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tantial question of law - We are further of the view that the reasons assigned by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal for deleting the disallowance of Rs. 7,74,883 keeping in view the method of accounting followed by the assessee do not suffer from any legal infirmity requiring reconsideration of the issue by this court. Therefore, even the second question framed by the Revenue cannot be treated as substantial question of law - - - - - Dated:- 7-4-2003 - Judge(s) : S. S. GREWAL., G. S. SINGHVI. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by G.S. SINGHVI J.-In this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Revenue has prayed for determination of the following questions of law: "(i) Whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessee explained its position vide letter dated December 24, 1993, in the following terms: "In this connection, your good self has desired clarification regarding secretary pay fund shown in the profit and loss account as on March 31, 1991, at Rs. 3,56,714 which was arrived at Rs. 12,54,053.70 as on March 31, 1992. In this connection, it is clarified that deficit for the year 1990-91 amounting to Rs. 10,33,110 has been debited to the secretary pay fund account on June 29, 1991. This amount of deficit was actually pertaining to the year 1990-91, but according to the practice in vogue the deficit was debited to the profit and loss account on June 29, 1991, when the closing of account for the co-operative year 1990-91 took place. This ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r passed by the Tribunal which contain reasons for dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue are reproduced below: "5. After considering the rival submissions and the materials on the file, we are of the view that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and for the reasons given in the impugned appellate order, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was justified in allowing the claim of exemption under section 80P of the Act. No material was brought on record by the learned Departmental Representative before us to show that the exemption under section 80P was not admissible in the case. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere in the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Accordingly, we uphold t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disentitle it to the benefit of statutory exemption. Therefore, the first question raised by the Revenue cannot be treated as substantial question of law requiring determination by this court. We are further of the view that the reasons assigned by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal for deleting the disallowance of Rs. 7,74,883 keeping in view the method of accounting followed by the assessee do not suffer from any legal infirmity requiring reconsideration of the issue by this court. Therefore, even the second question framed by the Revenue cannot be treated as substantial question of law within the meaning of section 260A of the Act. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is allowed (sic). - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
