9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he following question has been referred for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act"), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "E", New Delhi (in short, "the Tribunal") : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the terms of the contract between the assessee-compan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 4,50,000 in two instalments on November 9, 1970, and December 19, 1970, respectively. The assessee treated the said amounts as advance in the balance-sheet and brought to the credit of the profit and loss account a sum of Rs. 1,74,300. The said amount was stated to be relatable to the work-in-progress valued on the basis of booked time records of the staff engage in the execution of the contrac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under consideration against fees of Rs. 1,74,300 the assessee charged to the accounts a total amount of Rs. 1,24,231 as direct expenses on jobs undertaken. The Income-tax Officer held that since the payment had been received on completion of jobs mentioned as stage I and stage 11 of the contract, to that extent, professional fees had accrued to the assessee and the same had to be taken into consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ished that a sum of Rs. 4,50,000 was given to the assessee as advance. For the assessment year 1973-74, the assessee had treated similar receipts in the manner as done for the year under consideration and by order dated March 29, 1976, the Assessing Officer accepted the assessee's method. That being the position, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order was upheld. The prayer for reference was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry, the Tribunal noticed the factual aspects in their proper perspective and came to the conclusion that the sum of Rs. 4,50,000 was to be treated as advance. That being the position and in view of the factual conclusions recorded, we find no question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. The question is, therefore, not answered. This reference stands disposed of. - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
