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 Amends Order for Liquidated Damages, Aligning with Supreme Court Precedents on Contractual Liabilities.</h1> <h3>FFE. Minerals India (P) Limited. Versus Joint Commissioner Of Income-tax.</h3> FFE. Minerals India (P) Limited. Versus Joint Commissioner Of Income-tax. - TTJ 084, 907, Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of claim for warranty, guarantee, and liquidated damages.2. Rectification of errors in the Tribunal's order.3. Application of Supreme Court and High Court decisions.4. Method of accounting and its impact on the case.Summary:1. Disallowance of Claim for Warranty, Guarantee, and Liquidated Damages:The assessee appealed against the disallowance of claims for warranty, guarantee, and liquidated damages for the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99, amounting to Rs. 74,43,308 and Rs. 3,14,77,555, respectively. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance, stating that the liability for liquidated damages was not finalized and remained provisional.2. Rectification of Errors in the Tribunal's Order:The assessee filed a miscellaneous petition seeking rectification of the Tribunal's order dated 12th Dec., 2002, read with the order dated 24th Sept., 2003. The Tribunal initially dismissed the petition, considering it a review rather than a rectification. However, the assessee argued that the Tribunal overlooked the Supreme Court's decisions in Calcutta Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 1 (SC) and Bharat Earth Movers vs. CIT (2000) 162 CTR (SC) 325, which allow for the deduction of contractual liabilities.3. Application of Supreme Court and High Court Decisions:The Tribunal's decision was challenged for not conforming to the Supreme Court's rulings, which state that a contractual liability should be allowed as soon as it arises, even if the exact amount is determined later. The Tribunal also failed to consider the method of accounting regularly followed by the assessee and the relevant accounting standards. The Tribunal's oversight of these legal precedents was deemed a mistake apparent from the record, warranting rectification u/s 254(2) of the IT Act.4. Method of Accounting and Its Impact on the Case:The Tribunal did not address the method of accounting followed by the assessee, which was the mercantile system. The Supreme Court in CIT vs. Indo Nippon Chemicals Co. Ltd. (2003) 182 CTR (SC) 291 emphasized that the method of accounting should be consistent with accepted principles of accountancy. The Tribunal's failure to consider this aspect and the concept of real income led to an error of non-consideration of relevant issues.Conclusion:The Tribunal rectified its order dated 12th Dec., 2002, by deleting paras 11 to 16 and substituting them with new paragraphs that aligned with the Supreme Court's decisions. The Tribunal acknowledged the binding nature of contractual liabilities and allowed the claims for liquidated damages, thereby rectifying the earlier mistake and preventing a miscarriage of justice.
TaxTMI 