2013 (12) TMI 611

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... three substantial questions of law:- "i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was, in law, justified in allowing assessee's claim for deduction on account of interest on excess levey price and upholding the order of the CIT(A) that it was an ascertained liability? ii) If the answere to the question No.1 is in the affirmative, whether such liability accrued during the years relevant to the years under consideration and was allowable as such ? iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was in law, justified in allowing assessee's claim for deduction on account of liability towards the additional cane price to the tune of Rs.2,09,279/- for A.Y.1991-9....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on account of interest on excess levy price as below:- Assessment Year Amount 1984-85 Rs.11,84,468/- 1985-86 Rs.11,84,740/- The claim was rejected by the Assessing Officer. However, in appeal the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had deleted the addition which has been upheld by the Tribunal. We have heard Sri Shambhu Chopra, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue and Sri V K. Birla, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Company. It is agreed between the learned counsel for the parties that the interest one excess levy sugar price in respect of the assessment years in question is to be allowable in view of the decision of this Court given in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow vs. Dham....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....upheld the order appellate authority. Tribunal held as follows: "The second ground of appeal is relating to the addition of Rs.95,386/- on account of interest on additional cane price. The CIT (A) has deleted the addition under mistaken notion that the issue was covered by the decision of the Tribunal in assessee's own case. It has fairly been conceded by the learned counsel for the assessee that there was no decision of the Tribunal either in favour or against the asessee on this issue. In the past no such disallowance had been made and therefore, there was no decision of the Tribunal. Since the decision of the CIT (A) is centrary to the facts on record, we set aside his order on this issue. The Assessing Officer disallowed the interest....