https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5754 The dominant issue was whether excise duty demanded by the Excise Department constituted a contingent liability or an accrued statutory liability deductible in the relevant accounting period. The SC held that once the duty was quantified and a demand notice issued after show-cause proceedings, the liability became an ascertained debt with a binding legal obligation to pay unless and until set aside or modified. The pendency of a writ petition disputing the demand did not render the liability uncertain or contingent. Consequently, the HC's refusal to entertain the Revenue's request to raise and refer questions was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 17 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Dec 2025 00:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5754 The dominant issue was whether excise duty demanded by the Excise Department constituted a contingent liability or an accrued statutory liability deductible in the relevant accounting period. The SC held that once the duty was quantified and a demand notice issued after show-cause proceedings, the liability became an ascertained debt with a binding legal obligation to pay unless and until set aside or modified. The pendency of a writ petition disputing the demand did not render the liability uncertain or contingent. Consequently, the HC's refusal to entertain the Revenue's request to raise and refer questions was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5754