2013 (11) TMI 1248

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....997 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'A', Delhi, arising out of the Tribunal's order in Income Tax Appeal No. 6571/Del/91, for the Assessment Year 1984-85, by which the Tribunal has refused to refer the following questions of law:- "(1). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. ITAT was legally correct in holding that the additions made u/s 43 B of I.T. Act, 1961 on account of professional tax payable of Rs.28,000/- UPST 4 % payable of Rs.1,82,860/- UPCST payable at Rs.28,80,168/-, UPLST payable at Rs.50,472/- and UPLST 5 % payable at Rs.3528/- made be deleted? (2). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. ITAT was legally correct in deleting additions towards liabil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....97/- + ESI payable - 10,661/- = Total 32,80,806/- In appeal, the ld. CIT (A) has confirmed the addition of Rs.32,80,806/- under Section 43-B. against which the assessee went in appeal before ITAT. The ITAT vide their order, under consideration, quashed the order u/s 154 thus setting aside the order of the CIT (A). While setting aside the order, the ld. ITAT has observed that "on this issue, there are contrary decisions of various High Courts. The Delhi High Court in the case of M/s. Sanghi Motors Vs. Union of India and others 187 ITR 703 (Del) is against the assessee whereas the Patna high Court in the case of Jamshedpur Motor Accessorien Stores Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 189 ITR 70 (Pat.) has taken a view in favour of the asse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he unintended consequences of Section 43-B". 5. In Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd [(2009) 319 ITR 306 SC], the Supreme Court, followed Allied Motors (P) Ltd, and held as follows: "It is important to note once again that, by Finance Act, 2003, not only the second proviso is deleted but even the first proviso is sought to be amended by bringing about an uniformity in tax, duty, cess and fee on the one hand vis-a-vis contributions to welfare funds of employee(s) on the other. This is one more reason why we hold that the Finance Act, 2003, is retrospective in operation. Moreover, the judgement in Allied Motors (P) Limited (supra) is delivered by a Bench of three learned Judges, which is binding on us. Accordingly, we h....