2015 (8) TMI 869
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... clubbed, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order. Appeal wise adjudication is given in the following paragraphs of this order. ITA No.1218/M/2011 (By Revenue) 2. This appeal filed by the Revenue against the said order of the CIT (A)-2, Mumbai dated 2.11.2010. In this appeal, Revenue raised the following grounds which read as under: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 9,36,700/- being expenses incurred towards feasibility study holding it to be revenue in nature against expenses held by the AO. 1.1. The Ld CIT (A) further erred in overlooking the fact that assessee was merely acting as agent of the principal & the expenses incurred w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have followed the dicision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd (319 ITR 306) (SC) wherein it has been held that no distinction should be made between employers and employee's contribution to provident fund. 3. The Ld CIT (A) erred in directing to allow deduction for entrance fees of Rs. 6,00,000/- on deferred basis over a period of 5 years. 4. The respondent submits that the said expenditure of Rs. 6,00,000/- being revenue in nature ought to have been allowed as deduction entirely in the year in which such expenditure is incurred. In this regard, the respondent relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United Glass Mfg. Co. Ltd (Civil Appeal No.6447 of 2012). The Hon'ble Sup....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....43B of the Income Tax Act 1961 was inserted in the Act with effect from 1st April 1984 by which the mercantile system of accounting with regard to tax, duty and contribution to welfare funds stood discontinued and under section 43B of the Act, it became mandatory for the Assessees to account for the aforestated items not on a mercantile basis but on a cash basis. This situation continued between 1st April 1984 and 1st April 1988 when Parliament again amended section 43B and inserted the first proviso thereto which inter alia laid down that in the context of any sum payable by the Assessee by way of tax, duty, cess or fee, if paid by the Assessee even after the closing of the accounting year but before the date of filing of the return of inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ver, the second proviso once again created further difficulties for the Assessees - employers. Therefore, Industry once again made representations to the Ministry of Finance who, after taking cognizance of the difficulties, inserted an amendment vide Finance Act, 2003 which came into force with effect from 1st April 2004. In other words, with effect from 1 st April 2004, two changes were made in section 43B viz. deletion of the second proviso to section 43B and further amendment in the first proviso which reads as under:- "Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply in relation to any sum which is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income under subse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ught to be contended by Mr Malhotra on behalf of the Revenue. 9. Even otherwise, we fail to understand how this deduction could have been disallowed to the Assessee. Admittedly, the Assessment Year in question is 2006-07. The second proviso to section 43B quoted above was deleted with effect from 1st April 2004 and simultaneously the first proviso was also amended bringing about a uniformity in deductions claimed towards tax, duty, cess and fee on the one hand and contribution to the employees' provident fund, superannuation fund and other welfare funds on the other. These deductions being claimed in the return of income filed for the Assessment Year 2006-07, the amendments to Section 43B which came into force with effect from 1st Apr....