2016 (6) TMI 642

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of section 115JB and according to that the FBT is an allowable deduction ?  2. Whether the tribunal was correct in deleting the addition made by the assessing officer holding that the rectification is neither permissible u/s.154 nor u/s.115JB (explanation-1) in respect of exclusion of prior period expenditure? 3. Whether the tribunal was correct in deleting the addition made by the assessing officer in respect of addition of STT holding that none of the 9 items listed in explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) was included and hence, it could not have used this to enhance the book profit ?" 2. The relevant discussion by the Tribunal in the impugned order is at paras 4 to 7 which reads a s under: "4.The learned CIT (A) has exclud....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of 'book profit' u/s 115JB of the income tax Act". 5. On due consideration of the above, we are of the view that the learned CIT (A) has rightly excluded the FBT from the computation of book profit. 6. The next item is prior period expenditure. According to the learned CIT (A), Explanation-1 attached to section 115JB(2) does not provide for adjustment of this expenditure in the book profit. With the assistance of the learned representatives, we  have considered this issue. The learned CIT (A) has relied upon the order of the ITAT Mumbai in the case of Shivshashi Punarvasan Prakalpa Ltd vs. ITI 135 ITD 51 which is based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd, 254 ITR 273. For the purpose o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to be deleted". 7. On due consideration of the order of the CIT (A), we find no error in it. The adjustment made by the Assessing Officer cannot be made in an order passed u/s. 154. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this appeal of the Revenue, it is dismissed." 3. The aforesaid shows that so far as Fringe Benefit Tax (F.B.T.) is concerned, the Tribunal has not interfered with the view taken by the CIT(A), which was based on the Board circular dated 29-08-2005. When the Board has issued the circular and the FBT is found to be allowable while computing book profit, we do not see that any substantial question of law would arise on such aspect as sought to be canvassed. Same is the situation for the other two items, one for pri....