Tribunal allows deduction for kist and interest liabilities, following mercantile accounting rules.

The Tribunal upheld the decision to allow the deduction of Rs. 14,79,808, affirming that the liability to pay the kist and interest was not obliterated by the Kerala High Court judgment. The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the liabilities accrued during the relevant accounting year were permissible deductions, following the mercantile system of accounting. The Tribunal's decision was based on legal precedents and statutory obligations, dismissing the Revenue's arguments against the deduction.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in finding that the liability to pay the kist and interest is not obliterated by the Kerala High Court judgment.
2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in reversing the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and allowing the assessee a deduction of Rs. 14,79,808.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Liability to Pay Kist and Interest

The Tribunal determined that the liability to pay the kist and interest was not obliterated by the Kerala High Court judgment. The Revenue challenged this, arguing that the liability was not quantified and thus not enforceable. The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court decision in Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363, which held that an assessee following the mercantile system of accounting is entitled to deduct liabilities that accrued during the relevant accounting year, even if disputed. The Tribunal noted that the liability to pay kist and interest was incurred during the year 1981-82, making the provision for these amounts permissible. The Tribunal's stance was that the liability remained, despite the High Court's judgment in Issac Peter's case [1984] KLT 88, which only restrained coercive recovery until proper determination.

Issue 2: Deduction of Rs. 14,79,808

The Tribunal reversed the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s order, allowing the assessee a deduction of Rs. 14,79,808. The Revenue contended that the liability should be deductible only in the year it is determined. However, the Tribunal, referencing Kedarnath Jute Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. CIT, asserted that the deduction is valid in the year the liability accrues. The Tribunal also highlighted that the mercantile system of accounting was followed by the assessee, thus justifying the provision made for the kist and interest.

The Tribunal addressed the argument that the liability was contractual and not an allowable deduction by referencing the Kerala High Court's decision in Issac Peter's case [1984] KLT 88, which established that the State had a statutory obligation to supply arrack, and failure to do so partially or fully estopped the State from demanding full bid amounts. The Tribunal concluded that the liability to pay the balance kist amount and interest was a statutory liability, allowable as a deduction in the year it relates to.

The Tribunal also dismissed the Revenue's reliance on CIT v. K. Natarajan [1990] 185 ITR 352, clarifying that the case only dealt with the entitlement to claim deduction of interest paid and not the principal liability.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal's decision to allow the deduction of Rs. 14,79,808 was upheld, with the court affirming that the liability to pay the kist and interest was not obliterated by the Kerala High Court judgment. Both questions were answered in the affirmative, in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue.

---