TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (2) TMI 587
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Respondent : Mr Mihir Naniwadekar, Adv. ORDER P. C. 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act') challenge a common order dated 8th July 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellant Tribunal (the 'Tribunal) in respect of the Assessment Year 2007-08 and 2008-09. 2. The revenue has pressed the following question of law for our consideration: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot been paid, the Assessing Officer called upon the respondent to explain why the aforesaid amount should not be added to income under Section 43B of the Act. The respondent-assessee pointed out that the amount of service tax payable is not taken to the profit and loss account and but credited directly to the Service Tax Payable under the head Current Liabilities in the Balance Sheet. This was as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f filing of the return of Income. 6. In appeal, the Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the respondent-assessee's appeal by following decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Noble & Hewitt Pvt. Ltd. reported in 305 ITR 324. In the above case, it was held that as the amounts of service tax payable were not debited to the Profit and Loss Account, the occasion to apply Section 43B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the grievence of the Revenue as the Delhi High Court in Noble & Hewitt Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has considered both Section 43B of the Act and also the issue of mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee before it. The revenue is not able to point out why the decision of Delhi High Court requires reconsideration. In our view, the Delhi High Court's decision in Noble & Hewitt Pvt. Ltd. ....