9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isputed electricity charges to the APSEB cannot be termed as fees and that the Revenue has to give deduction to the said amount. Tribunal while allowing the Appeal held that the electricity charges partake the nature of statutory liability and accordingly will have to be allowed as deduction irrespective of whether or not the same has been paid and notwithstanding that the assessee has disputed any liability to pay any part of such charges. Section 43B of the Act does not speak about the electricity charges. Nowhere it is mentioned in the Section or proviso to it that unpaid electricity charges are not deductable. Revenue cannot interpret the provisions of Section 43B of the Act in its favour, since the provisions of Section do not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Income Tax Department appearing for the appellant and Mr. Challa Gunaranjan, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue as the appellant under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (briefly the Act hereinafter) assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 30.05.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench A , Hyderabad (Tribunal) in I.T.A. No. 643/Hyd/2001 for the assessment year 1996-97. 3. Though the appeal was admitted on 01.04.2004, substantial questions of law were not framed as required under Section 260-A of the Act. However, from the memo of appeal, we find that the following two questions have been proposed as substantial questions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not so claimed by the assessee either in the income tax return filed or during the assessment proceedings before the assessing officer. 6. It is not necessary for us to traverse through the orders passed by the revenue authorities inasmuch as both the questions are covered by decisions of the Supreme Court as well as of this Court. 7. Insofar the first question is concerned, the same is squarely covered by a decision of this Court reported in CIT v. Andhra Ferro Alloys (P) Ltd. 2012 (349) ITR 255. In the said decision, a Division Bench of this Court had examined the contours of Section 43B of the Act and thereafter, held as follows: Section 43B of the Act does not specifically mention about the electricity charges. The pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vour, since the provisions of Section do not incorporate the electricity charges. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that such electricity charges are in the nature of statutory liability and the Revenue has to allow them as deduction irrespective of whether or not the same has been paid and notwithstanding that the assessee has disputed any liability to pay any part of such charges. 8. Regarding the second question, the issue was settled by the Supreme Court in National Thermal Power Company Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1997) 7 SCC 489 = 1998 (229) ITR 383, which was explained by the Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax (1997) 7 SCC 489 = 1998 (229) ITR 383. This issue cropped up ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
