9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lil Aggarwal with Mr Prakash Kumar For the Respondent : Mr R. D. Jolly CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This appeal is directed against the Tribunal's order dated 20.01.2006 in ITA 2708/D/2002 pertaining to the assessment year 1998-1999. For the year ending 31.03.1998, the assessee had provided for a sum of Rs 72 lacs under the head 'salaries and wages', pending revision. The Assessing Officer found that this liability had been provided for in relation to wage revision implemented with effect from 01.07.1997. But, the liability on account of wage revision had not been ascertained and had not accrued during the year which ended on 31.03.1998. Conseque ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the arguments advanced before it, the Tribunal came to a conclusion that in the case of the assessee the Board of Directors had taken a conscious decision that no revision of pay should be made for the period prior to 01.07.1999, as indicated by the minutes of 65 th meeting of the Board of Directors held on 28.09.1998 under agenda item No. 6. The said minutes have been placed before us in the appeal paper book. We note that under agenda item No. 6, paragraph 6.1 of the said minutes clearly indicates that the Board considered the matter in depth, particularly, the issue whether the pay scales should be revised with effect from 01.07.1997 ?in relaxation of the earlier Board decision that there should be no wage revision before 01.07.1999.? ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isting on the balance sheet date. The Tribunal observed that in the case of the assessee the condition existing on the balance sheet date, that is, on 31.03.1998 was, at best, the revision of pay being contemplated with effect from 01.07.1999. The Tribunal observed that there was no indication of any revision of the pay scales payable by the assessee for the year 01.07.1997 to 31.03.1998. Consequently, the Tribunal returned a finding of fact that the liability itself had been incurred by the assessee only during the financial year 1998-1999. 7. In view of these findings, the decision arrived at by the Tribunal cannot be faulted. No substantial question of law arises for our consideration. The appeal is dismissed. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
