9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. As far as the appeal for the assessment year 2003-04 is concerned, the first issue is that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in disallowing the provisions made for contract contingencies for a sum of ₹ 13,64,000/-. 3. Shri L.V.Srinivasan, the learned authorized representative appearing for the assessee, has argued at length on this point on the basis of the binding nature of the Accounting Standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. Inspite of the arguments of the learned authorized representative, we have to see that the very same issue was adjudicated by the A-Bench of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2001-02 through its commo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istration of the assessee s business, out of which enduring benefit is contemplated. Establishing such a supporting system involves three components, namely, hardware, software and training and implementation expenses. It is the case of the assessee that even if the first two components would be capital in nature, the third component relating to expenses on training and implementation should be treated as revenue in nature and to be allowed as a deduction in full. We are not able to agree with the above argument. The ERP system is established by the assessee as a wholesome project. It is only when the project is dissected that we come to know that it comprises more than one identifiable segment. The first one is hardware; the second one is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fourth issue raised by the assessee is against the disallowance of the claim for deduction of excise duty on closing stock of finished goods amounting to ₹ 1,44,70,000/-. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has confirmed the disallowance on the ground that the deduction was claimed by the assessee on the basis of a provision made for excise duty. But the learned authorized representative has stated that the said excise duty has been paid by the assessee company before the due date for filing of the return of income. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the claim for deduction of excise duty to the extent the same has been paid by the assessee company before the due date for filing of the return of income. 11. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
