DCIT, Cir.9, Pune, Pune v. Maharashtra Scooters Limited,, Pune

ITA 72/PUN/2010 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 28-04-2014 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 7224514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AABCM1799E
Bench Pune
Appeal Number ITA 72/PUN/2010
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant DCIT, Cir.9, Pune, Pune
Respondent Maharashtra Scooters Limited,, Pune
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-04-2014
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 28-04-2014
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 15-01-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.71 & 72/PN/2010 (A.YS: 2005-06 & 2004-05) DY. CIT CIRCLE 9 PUNE APPELLANT VS. MAHARASHTRA SCOOTERS LIMITED C/S BAJAJ AUTO LIMITED AKURDI PUNE 411035 PAN: AABCM1799E RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI KISHOR PHADKE AND SHRI P.S. KARPE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI P.L. PATHADE DATE OF HEARING : 03.04.2014 DATE OF ORDER : 28.04.2014 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV J.M: THE TRIBUNAL HAD PASSED THE ORDER IN BOTH THE ABOV E APPEALS VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 09.10.2009. LATER ON MISCELL ANEOUS APPLICATION WAS MOVED INTER ALIA SUBMITTED THAT GROUND NO.4 R AISED ON BEHALF OF REVENUE REMAINED TO BE ADJUDICATED. THIS PROPOS ITION IS NOT IN DISPUTE. THE GROUND REMAINED TO BE ADJUDICATED REA D AS UNDER: WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD.CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB DO NOT PERMIT ANY ADJUSTMENT TO THE B OOK PROFITS IN RESPECT OF PROVISION FOR LEAVE ENCASHMENT WHICH IS AN UNASCERTAINED AND CONTINGENT LIABILITY? 2. WE FIND THAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 200 3-04 A SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE WHEREIN THE CONCERNED CIT(A) HAS DECID ED THE SIMILAR ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 2 9.2 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND I FIND MERIT IN IT. THE ISSUE OF PROVISION FOR LEAVE ENCASHMENT IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT IN APPELLANTS OWN CASE. THEREFORE THE LIABILITY IN THE SHAPE OF PROVISION FOR LEAVE ENCASHMENT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE UNASCERTAINED LIABILITY AND HENCE THE SAME IS NOT HIT BY CLAUSE ( D) OF SECTION 115JB(2) 3. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS CONFIRMED THE SAME IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2003-04. NOTHING CONTRARY HAS BE EN BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE. FACTS BEING SIMILAR SO FOLLOWING T HE SAME REASONING WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDING O F CIT(A) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE LIABILITY IN THE SHAPE OF PR OVISION FOR LEAVE ENCASHMENT COULD NOT BE SAID TO BE UNASCERTAINED LI ABILITY AND HENCE IS NOT HIT BY CLAUSE (C) OF SECTION 115JB(2) OF ACT. THE SAME IS UPHELD. 4. A SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE IN A.Y. 2004-05. FACTS BE ING SIMILAR SO FOLLOWING THE SAME REASONING WE ARE NOT INCLINED T O INTERFERE WITH THE FINDING OF CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. THIS REASONED FINDING OF CIT(A) NEEDS NO INTERFERENCE FROM OUR SIDE FOR THE REASONS DISCUSSED ABOVE. WE UPHOLD THE SAME. AS A RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS OF REVENUE ARE DISMISSED ON THIS ACCOUNT WHICH REMAINED TO BE ADJU DICATED IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. 5. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS OF REVENUE ARE D ISMISSED VIS-- VIS ON THE ABOVE ISSUE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 28 TH DAY OF APRIL 2014. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE DATED: 28 TH APRIL 2014 GCVSR 3 COPY TO:- 1. DEPARTMENT 2. ASSESSEE 3. THE CIT(A)-V PUNE 4. THE CIT-V PUNE 5. THE DR A BENCH I.T.A.T. PUNE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T. PUNE