CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsFull Bench(2002) 02 RAJ CK 0019

Commissioner of Income Tax vs Sita Ram Rameshwar Prasad

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 12 February 2002 · Citation: (2002) 175 CTR 168

HON’BLE JUDGES
Y.R. Meena, J · A.C. Goyal, J
CASE NUMBER
IT Ref. No. 26 of 1993 12 February 2002 A.Y. 1984-85 to 1986-87
Download PDFAsk AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 375 words

By the Court

On an application filed u/s 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the following questions for the opinion of this court :

Asst. yr. 1984-85

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that no disallowance was to be made u/s 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of outstanding sales-tax liability of Rs. 34,576 shown in the balance-sheet at the end of the relevant accounting year as the said liability had been discharged by the assessee within the time prescribed under the relevant sales-tax law ?"

Asst. yr. 1985-86

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that no disallowance was to be made u/s 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of outstanding sales-tax liability of Rs. 2,210 shown in the balance-sheet at the end of the relevant accounting year as the said liability had been discharged by the assessee within the time prescribed under the relevant sales-tax law ?"

Asst. yr. 1986-87

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that no disallowance was to be made u/s 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of outstanding sales-tax liability of Rs. 9,267 shown in the balance-sheet at the end of the relevant accounting year as the said liability had been discharged by the assessee within the time prescribed under the relevant sales-tax law ?"

2.

At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submits that now the issue is concluded by their lordships in the case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, . Learned counsel for the revenue has not controverted this fact.

Following the view taken by their Lordships in the case of Allied Motors (P) Ltd. v. CIT (supra), we answer all these questions in negative that the Tribunal has not erred in allowing the deduction of the amount of sales-tax, which has been paid within the time prescribed under the relevant sales-tax law i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.

Reference so made stands disposed of accordingly.

OPEN