TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (7) TMI 452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08. We shall take up the Revenue's appeal, being senior, first. 2. The first ground relates to the deletion of the addition made in respect of old credit balances outstanding in the account of importer/s, for having been written back by the assessee in its account during the current year. The basis of the addition by the Assessing Officer (AO) is that the credit/s represented a trading liability, so that the profit on its write back was only revenue in nature. Before the ld. CIT(A) it was contended by the assessee that the credit balance/s, written back in terms of the rehabilitation scheme approved by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ('BIFR.' for short), included not only those on account of trading operations, but al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee belatedly, i.e., beyond the due date by which the same is to be paid (to the credit of the respective employees) under the relevant, the PF Act. The ld. CIT(A) allowed the assessee's claim relying on the various decisions mentioned at para 8.2, page 6 of his order; the payment/s having been admittedly made before the due date of filing the return of income. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal. 5. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. The contravention of the provision of section 36(1)(va) is tabulated at page 4 of the AO's order. The relevant data, i.e., the difference or the delay in the payment of the employee's contribution by the assessee, as listed thereat, is not in dispute. Before us, while the Reve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce written back in accounts. While the addition by the AO was on the basis that the said waiver represented a trading/revenue receipt, and found confirmation by the ld. CIT(A) on the same basis, the assessee's case is that the credit balance in the account of M/s. Dhir & Dhir Associates, i.e., Rs. 59.39 lacs (PB page 8 - 18), which stood written back to the extent of 90% consequent to the BIFR order, included Rs. 50 lacs by way of a loan received on 16-03-2006 (PB page 15). The write back in the accounts is thus not wholly on revenue account and bears a capital receipt to that extent (Rs. 45 lacs). The write back would not operate to alter the character of the capital receipt so as to form part of income u/s. 2(24) of the Act. The ld. DR, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dence/s in its respect. In fact, the ld. AR was specifically questioned by the Bench during hearing with regard to having adduced any confirmation as to the nature of the liability to M/s. Dhir & Dhir Associates, to an answer in the negative. It must, at the same time, be appreciated that the close associate has only lost its capital to that extent, the treatment of which amount in its accounts, as also its tax return/s, may also be relevance, i.e., inasmuch as it clarifies or exhibits the nature of the sum credited, having been quizzically received even as it was apparent that the same is to a sick company, with no or little scope of recovery. In any case, if it, as contended, represents a loan liability, i.e., on capital account, its writ....