TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules on prior period expenses, emphasizing verification and adjustment in income computations</h1> <h3>Dy. CIT-6 Kanpur Versus M/s U.P. State Handloom Corporation Ltd.</h3> Dy. CIT-6 Kanpur Versus M/s U.P. State Handloom Corporation Ltd. - TMI Issues:1. Allowability of prior period expenses in computation of income for assessment year 2006-07.Analysis:The Revenue appealed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to verify the issue of allowability of prior period expenses amounting to Rs.3,62,98,289/- and recompute the loss for the assessment year 2006-07. The Assessing Officer disallowed these expenses as they pertained to a prior period and added them to the total income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) considered the contentions of the assessee and noted that the prior period expenses were below the line adjustment and carried to the balance sheet without being claimed for income-tax purposes. The ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to verify this and recompute the loss. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) as the assessee did not include the prior period expenses in the computation of income, thereby confirming the decision.In another appeal, similar issues arose regarding the allowability of prior period expenses against current income. The ld. CIT(A) examined the case in light of relevant judgments and allowed netting of prior period expenses against prior period income. The Revenue contended that net prior period expenses should not be allowed against the current income of the financial year. The Tribunal modified the ld. CIT(A)'s order and directed the Assessing Officer to verify and make any necessary disallowance only with respect to the net prior period expenses debited to the profit and loss account of the current year if not crystallized during the financial year. Consequently, the appeal of the Revenue in one case was dismissed, while in the other case, it was allowed for statistical purposes.Overall, the judgments focused on the treatment of prior period expenses in the computation of income for the respective assessment years, emphasizing the need for proper verification and adjustment based on the nature of these expenses and their impact on the financial statements.
TaxTMI 