Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the difference between the deferred sales tax liability and its net present value, paid under the State prepayment scheme, was taxable as business income under section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, or was a capital receipt not chargeable to tax.
Analysis: The liability had been deferred under the Maharashtra incentive schemes and was later discharged by payment of its net present value as prescribed under the amended sales tax law. The assessment had allowed the sales tax liability under section 43B on the basis of the statutory deeming fiction in the Board circular. The Bench held that the first condition of section 41(1), namely an allowance or deduction in respect of a loss, expenditure or trading liability in the relevant sense, was not satisfied for the present controversy. It further held that payment of the net present value of a future liability, in accordance with the statutory formula, was not a remission or cessation of liability; the Government had not waived any part of the liability but had merely accepted early discharge at a discounted present value. The amount represented the difference between the future liability and its present value and, on the facts, did not amount to a benefit taxable under section 41(1).
Conclusion: The difference between the deferred sales tax liability and the net present value paid by the assessee was held to be a capital receipt and not taxable under section 41(1).